[governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy on Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act / trial period

Paul Lehto lehto.paul at gmail.com
Tue Jul 12 07:12:11 EDT 2011

It seems to be beyond question that taxes are the rent we must and
should pay for civil and civilized society.  While debatable at the
margin in terms of how much taxation is desirable and in some cases
for what purposes, there's no doubt that every individual and business
needs and relies upon the roads, telecommunications infrastructures,
fire and police services, legal infrastructure and so forth for their
very livelihood and modern existence.  To equate taxation with
parasitism in a broad way is not a responsible position, though it is
a common political attack designed mainly to put a downward pressure
on the amount of taxation.  Still, it "proves" or claims way too much,
and is not a responsible or factually accurate position to take.

I'm not saying this was Milton's intent in his expression (to equate
all taxation with "parasitism") but this is the political bell that's
rung in my mind and I believe the minds of others as well, whenever
the idea of "parasitism" is attached to government taxation without
careful restriction of the scope of that word to specific facts of
specific cases of opportunistic over-taxation.

Applied to the internet, the metaphor of parasitism can have more
power than it deserves.  When users get accustomed to "free" internet
access they may start to erroneously believe that the internet happens
without government services in the form of telecommunications
infrastructure, legal infrastructure and so forth, and therefore
mistakenly oppose proposals to secure continued support for these
things to keep the internet well.
Paul Lehto, J.D.
On 7/12/11, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
> On Monday 11 July 2011 11:43 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> Local governments have a lot to do with local things. Or have you
>> forgotten about things like roads, schools, crime and law enforcement,
>> etc.?
> I havent forgotten them, but maybe you have! All these things need taxes
> to be collected. And you seem to consider legitimate taxation as a
> parasitizing activity.....
>> Local govts that try to parasitize virtual businesses tend not to
>> focus on what they need to be doing.
> that just your ideological gov-hatred coming through, or else do you
> have any basis for making such a sweeping statement?
> Milton, Either you accept local jurisdictions and their disparate tax
> systems or you work for some kind of a global regime which is fair to
> all. You cant run away from both, as you seem to do.
>   Parminder
>> *From:*parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
>> *Sent:* Saturday, July 09, 2011 3:08 AM
>> *To:* Milton L Mueller
>> *Cc:* governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'McTim'
>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy
>> on Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act /
>> trial period
>> On Friday 08 July 2011 09:40 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> Good god, let's hope not.
>> shd we than dissolve local governments, and it is enough that the US
>> collects most of the taxes from the world over because in any case it
>> seems to be doing much of the governance.... (someone said recently,
>> ironically of course, that everyone in the world should be allowed to
>> vote for forming the US government!)
>> Do municipal statutes have jurisdiction over non-local global
>> corporations with only a virtual presence/assets locally i.e. can a
>> municipal tax apply to virtually supplied electronic apps for example?

Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:

For all other list information and functions, see:
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list