FC: Financial Times commentary: It's time to tax all email!

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Tue May 06 2003 - 21:40:25 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: "Smart parks" are watching you from the shrubbery"

    [Anyone remember that UN report talking about an email tax -- a 
    thinly-disguised wealth transfer to African governments? --Declan]
    
    ---
    
    Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 23:53:51 -0700
    To: declanat_private
    From: "Roger E. Rustad, Jr."
    Subject: FT editorial: taxing e-mail in the hopes of canning spam
    
    An editorial that might interest Politech subscribers:
    
    http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1051389718756
    
    Christopher Caldwell criticizes current attempts to regulate spam. Re: 
    Lessig's bounty-on-spammer proposal:
    
    "This is a terrible idea that will make millionaires of two classes of 
    people: reprobates who illegally maraud through others' hard drives; and 
    those who have built their expertise about spam by peddling it."
    
    He considers the recent FTC spam conference "barking up the wrong tree," 
    and thinks that the simplest way to regulate spam is through a tax:
    
    "The simplest way to regulate spam is through a tax. This requires smashing 
    some myths. A decade ago, Americans were gulled by politicians of both 
    parties into believing that taxing the internet exceeded the government's 
    capability. When that proved to be manifestly untrue, they were told that a 
    tax would be an affront to some mythic libertarian "spirit of the 
    internet". The tax moratorium on internet sales has always been supremely 
    unfair, offering, say, Amazon a de facto subsidy against taxpaying local 
    bookstores.
    
    But, very soon, the Internet should turn into a penny post, with a levy of 
    1 cent per letter. This would cost the average e-mailer about $10 a year. 
    Small companies would pay bills in the hundreds of dollars; very large ones 
    in the thousands. And spammers would be driven to honest employment. The 
    tax could be made progressive by exempting, say, those who sent fewer than 
    5,000 letters a year. The proceeds could go to maintain and expand bandwidth."
    
    (If you fwd to the list, please remove my e-mail)
    
    Thx,
    Roger
    contributing editor
    GrepLaw.org
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue May 06 2003 - 23:12:46 PDT