backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 87 comment(s) - last by JustTom.. on Feb 5 at 1:23 AM
Tax revenue will help move delinquent 17-year-olds into juvenile detention

This week, Wisconsin state Senator Jon Erpenbach proposed a bill that would add an additional tax on video games and gaming equipment, like consoles and accessories.

The new tax would levy a 1% surcharge on the sale of video games and related equipment, with funds applied towards the cost of moving non-violent, delinquent 17-year-olds into the juvenile detention system, as they are currently treated, prosecuted, and incarcerated as adults.

According to Erpenbach, the tax has nothing to do with dissuading gamers or casting videogames in an undesirable light; rather the idea is that the tax is “a kind of kids-kids thing,” with gamers helping out fellow youth stuck behind bars in an adult prison system.

Despite the fact that the bill’s emphasis is on moving non-violent youth offenders into the juvenile court system, gamers have latched onto the tax as an unfair attack on their hobby. Justin Sallows, an adult Wisconsin gamer speaking to WISC-TV, thinks that the tax is “a real problem ... even if that’s not what the intention is, it creates the impression that there's something wrong with the video games because we need to put some extra tax on there to try to dissuade people from playing them.”

Wisconsin’s justice system arrests and charges 98% of its 30,000 17-year-olds arrested yearly with minor offenses, and the cost for transferring them into the juvenile system is expected to be very high, said Erpenbach. “I think it's the right thing to do because not all 17-year-olds belong in the adult system when it comes to non-violent offenses.”

Not all gamers fit the age group that Erpenbach is targeting, however. Sallows, for example, is 37 years old: “I just think it's pretty unfair to attack gamers and have them pay for something they, more than likely, have nothing to do with.”

Erpenbach maintained that he is open to suggestions. “If we're going to do this for kids maybe this [tax] would be a good way to go about it. And if it's not the best way, I'm open to any other way,” he said.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Another Tax
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 9:31:57 AM , Rating: 1
Wow, go figure....a Democrat wanting to impose yet another new tax. May citizens who buy video games pay more money to help out young criminals to get easier sentances by going to juvenile detention instead of adult prison.

Yeah, that ought to teach them a less! Throw them in detention hall with other kids, instead of harsher penalty and being stuck with big Bubba.

Hell, maybe the Senator will impose a larger tax than the suggested 1% and give the criminals no prison sentence and instead, let them stay at home and use that tax money to buy them video games.

Penalize people spending their hard earned money so that it can be redstributed to criminals.

Another democrat earmark...go figure.




RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 9:53:49 AM , Rating: 5
For once you are right. Democrats shouldn't be imposing new taxes on video games. They should focus their sights on reinstating taxes that Bush and his Republican fingerpuppets gave to the one industry that is making record profits in the billions every quarter. I guess when you have allies in the white house you really can get what you want. Cheney, Halliburton, no bid contracts, nah, too much of a coincidence to actually have happened.


RE: Another Tax
By FITCamaro on 12/27/2007 10:18:37 AM , Rating: 3
All repealing those tax breaks on the oil companies would have done would be to raise the cost of gas for us the consumer.

Now yes, I agree with you. I think its ridiculous that an industry making billions a quarter in profits has tax breaks. But when repealing them means that they're just going to pass that lost money on to me and you? I'd rather they just get the tax breaks.

As far as mdogs post, well said. All this would do is show 17 year olds who like to cause trouble that they have less to fear of causing trouble. Personally I feel anyone committing an adult crime should be tried as an adult. If you shoot someone, you shouldn't get out in a few years just because you were 16 at the time. You were grown up enough to shoot someone, you're grown up enough to face the consequences. And many gangs out there use minors for violent crimes because there's the chance they won't be tried as an adult.

And besides, what does taxing video games have to do with delinquent teenagers? Absolutely nothing. All it is is trying to further the stereotype that video games cause violence.


RE: Another Tax
By F00bar3 on 12/27/07, Rating: -1
RE: Another Tax
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 10:39:17 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, the Republican controlled Congress approved the $7.7 Billion tax break to oil companies to claim deductions for oil & gas production and refining.

The thought behind the deduction is that the bottom line for oil companies (or any company for that matter) is always increasing profits each quarter/year. By giving tax breaks, they will be able to charge less for oil and still make the same amount of profits. Since we, the people, already pay the tax breaks out of our tax dollars, we would be seeing a discount on the oil at the pump. By getting rid of the tax deduction, the oil companies are going to increase their prices to account for the $7.7 Billion that they are not getting.

So anyone here can pick their poison, but the fact is that we all (or 99.9% of us anyway) need gas & oil. We will be paying our same federal taxes (unless the democrats get into office and increase them) - so if we are paying taxes, why not have some of that go to paying for our oil, rather than it not paying for our oil and then we just paying higher prices at the pump?


RE: Another Tax
By sinful on 12/27/2007 11:47:47 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
rather than it not paying for our oil and then we just paying higher prices at the pump?


Because you're sabotaging the competition / alternatives.

It's like giving Ford a huge tax break and not giving one to GM. You've essentially made GM vehicles more expensive, and thus less competitive, with Ford. In fact, even if GM comes out with a superior car and can do it for less than Ford, if Ford's tax break is enough it doesn't matter - Ford can still charge less. And it's not just GM that's at a disadvantage now, it's EVERY car company that didn't get the tax break.

In the same vein, giving the oil industry a huge tax break penalizes any alternatives to oil that might be in development, by essentially making them more expensive in comparison.

Considering we want alternatives to flourish, it seems silly to give more and more benefits to the oil industry.


RE: Another Tax
By mdogs444 on 12/27/07, Rating: 0
RE: Another Tax
By retrospooty on 12/27/2007 1:09:39 PM , Rating: 2
You give Al Gore far too much credit for having any affect on this world.

This is a 100% oil company created mess that benefits nothing but oil companies and thier cronies - Helped along by the oil companies best allies the Bush admin.

Welcome to the world you live in.


RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 1:51:18 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, Al Gore is given way too much credit and I think the government of the UK put it right by banning his video from their schools. Propaganda at it's best right there.


RE: Another Tax
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 1:56:01 PM , Rating: 3
Unfortunately, they did not "ban" it I dont beleive. I think they are requiring him to show a certain disclaimer prior to the audience viewing the movie stating that it is political propaganda and that much of the information in the movie is not backed up scientifically.

Don't get me wrong, he has a freedom of speach as does anyone else. But forcing political propaganda in schools, as well as falsifications of global warming, is just as bad as teaching students that only creationism is right, or that evolution is only right. To be shown in a public school,it should be created in a non agenda orientation, non propagandized topic, and only 100% real facts stated so that students (and other people alike) can make their own judgements.......


RE: Another Tax
By Ringold on 12/27/2007 3:03:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Considering we want alternatives to flourish, it seems silly to give more and more benefits to the oil industry.


I guess maybe if all you watch is Katie Couric you'd of not got the memo, but "alternatives" to fossil fuels are getting showered in tax payer dollars in a way oil could only dream of. Ethanol has benefited from being a defacto "pick a winner" government technology for the future, despite being wildly inefficient. It's making a lot of people very rich.

You do point out one problem with the tax code, though. It's easy to propagandize, because tax breaks are offset with tax breaks, credits, subsidies, etc etc etc to the point where it can be difficult to see whats happening.

Which is, by the way, exactly the way the government likes it.


RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 10:48:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
All repealing those tax breaks on the oil companies would have done would be to raise the cost of gas for us the consumer.

quote:
Now yes, I agree with you. I think its ridiculous that an industry making billions a quarter in profits has tax breaks. But when repealing them means that they're just going to pass that lost money on to me and you? I'd rather they just get the tax breaks.


So by having these tax breaks, does that explain why gas prices have been going down and not up?

quote:
As far as mdogs post, well said. All this would do is show 17 year olds who like to cause trouble that they have less to fear of causing trouble. Personally I feel anyone committing an adult crime should be tried as an adult. If you shoot someone, you shouldn't get out in a few years just because you were 16 at the time. You were grown up enough to shoot someone, you're grown up enough to face the consequences. And many gangs out there use minors for violent crimes because there's the chance they won't be tried as an adult.


His post was more of a slander on democrats then it was a response to the actual article. Besides, I never said anything about sheltering kids from ajudication if they committ a crime. I personally believe that if they do the crime, they should do the time as well. No argument there.

quote:
And besides, what does taxing video games have to do with delinquent teenagers? Absolutely nothing. All it is is trying to further the stereotype that video games cause violence.


Absolutely nothing, I never said it had anything to do with it. In fact, I do believe I said Mdog was actually right in this instance in my OP.


RE: Another Tax
By F00bar3 on 12/27/2007 10:54:31 AM , Rating: 3
I guess I have to spell it out. THERE WAS NO TAX CUT FOR OIL COMPANIES. Liberals most effectively lie through ommission. Yes, there was a bill reducing certain taxes on oil companies, but included in that Republican bill were other taxes that not only eliminated any net tax break, but actually RAISED taxes on the oil industry.

This is from the non-partisan factcheck.org

It’s true that many generous subsidies were proposed and debated, but those were stripped out before the bill was passed in the midst of rising oil prices. As we reported last year, the bill as it was passed contained $14.3 billion in tax breaks, but the bulk of the cuts went to electric utilities, and nuclear, and also to alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient cars , homes and buildings – not to the oil industry. And as the CRS notes, the breaks that the oil and gas industry received were more than offset by tax increases contained in the same measure.


RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 10:57:25 AM , Rating: 2
From Mdog up above in response to your previous post:

Actually, the Republican controlled Congress approved the $7.7 Billion tax break to oil companies to claim deductions for oil & gas production and refining.

The thought behind the deduction is that the bottom line for oil companies (or any company for that matter) is always increasing profits each quarter/year. By giving tax breaks, they will be able to charge less for oil and still make the same amount of profits. Since we, the people, already pay the tax breaks out of our tax dollars, we would be seeing a discount on the oil at the pump. By getting rid of the tax deduction, the oil companies are going to increase their prices to account for the $7.7 Billion that they are not getting.

So anyone here can pick their poison, but the fact is that we all (or 99.9% of us anyway) need gas & oil. We will be paying our same federal taxes (unless the democrats get into office and increase them) - so if we are paying taxes, why not have some of that go to paying for our oil, rather than it not paying for our oil and then we just paying higher prices at the pump?


RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 11:00:25 AM , Rating: 2
Meant to hit preview on this one and not post, sorry about the double post.


RE: Another Tax
By Bioniccrackmonk on 12/27/2007 10:58:11 AM , Rating: 2
From Mdog up above in response to your previous post:

Actually, the Republican controlled Congress approved the $7.7 Billion tax break to oil companies to claim deductions for oil & gas production and refining.

The thought behind the deduction is that the bottom line for oil companies (or any company for that matter) is always increasing profits each quarter/year. By giving tax breaks, they will be able to charge less for oil and still make the same amount of profits. Since we, the people, already pay the tax breaks out of our tax dollars, we would be seeing a discount on the oil at the pump. By getting rid of the tax deduction, the oil companies are going to increase their prices to account for the $7.7 Billion that they are not getting.

So anyone here can pick their poison, but the fact is that we all (or 99.9% of us anyway) need gas & oil. We will be paying our same federal taxes (unless the democrats get into office and increase them) - so if we are paying taxes, why not have some of that go to paying for our oil, rather than it not paying for our oil and then we just paying higher prices at the pump?

quote:
I guess I have to spell it out. THERE WAS NO TAX CUT FOR OIL COMPANIES


Since you are spelling it out for us, you should probably use spell check first. just a thought.


RE: Another Tax
By F00bar3 on 12/27/07, Rating: 0
RE: Another Tax