F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by dkhenry on Monday February 02, 2015 @02:41PM (#8986367)

The power to tax is the power to destroy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by alexqgb on Monday February 02, 2015 @04:29PM (#8987122)

Yes, and the power to drive a car is the power to commit vehicular manslaughter. The question is not whether a driver can use this power to kill. It's whether they are actually using this power to kill.

Needless to say, not evey tax is destructive, just as not every driver is a deadly menace who needs to be gotten of the road a.s.a.p.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by sliverstorm on Monday February 02, 2015 @06:03PM (#8987712)

not every driver is a deadly menace who needs to be gotten of the road a.s.a.p.

Have you been on the interstate recently? ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by x11window on Monday February 02, 2015 @02:53PM (#8986468)

are you an anarchist or something?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by akama on Monday February 02, 2015 @03:00PM (#8986537)

It's a rather famous quote from Chief Justice John Marshall for context.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by skylan_q on Monday February 02, 2015 @02:52PM (#8986462)

I don't understand how people can disagree with this. He's perfectly correct. How often does one cite the price of cigarettes to quit smoking them?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by glesica on Monday February 02, 2015 @03:08PM (#8986591)

That's nonsensical. It all depends on the utility of the smoker. Cigarette taxes are, in theory at least, Pigouvian taxes in the sense that the goal is to reduce the harm caused by smoking. They accomplish this in two ways, first, by providing funds to deal with the associated medical costs and two, by reducing the number of people who choose to smoke.

Whether you agree with the assessed level of negative externalities or not (I don't, actually), the tax hasn't "destroyed" anything. Smoking still exists. Fewer people get sufficient utility from smoking to go on doing so, but that's the point of the tax in this case. Too many people were smoking previously due to market inefficiencies. Now the "correct" (again, I believe the externalities were lower than many people believe they were) number of people are smoking.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as ... by alexqgb on Monday February 02, 2015 @04:43PM (#8987219)

It's not that he's incorrect. It's that his observation is generalized to the point of being a useless distraction from this particular conversation. Had he indicated how the potentially destructive power of taxation is actually being used destructively and deliberately in this particular case, he'd have said something knowledgeable and interesting. But of course, that's not what happened.

[ Parent | on HN ]