<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_05_0535221</id>
	<title>Internet Tax Approved By Louisiana House</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1244204280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:chudgins1@verizon.net" rel="nofollow">Stinky Litter Box</a> writes <i>"WWL-TV in New Orleans reports that the Louisiana House voted 81-9 on Thursday to propose that a '<a href="http://www.wwltv.com/topstories/stories/wwl060409cbcharge.4bfa7f82.html">15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana</a> to fight online criminal activity.'  Can you say 'slippery slope?'  The good news is that Gov. Jindal opposes such a tax.  Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stinky Litter Box writes " WWL-TV in New Orleans reports that the Louisiana House voted 81-9 on Thursday to propose that a '15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activity .
' Can you say 'slippery slope ?
' The good news is that Gov .
Jindal opposes such a tax .
Full disclosure : I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stinky Litter Box writes "WWL-TV in New Orleans reports that the Louisiana House voted 81-9 on Thursday to propose that a '15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activity.
'  Can you say 'slippery slope?
'  The good news is that Gov.
Jindal opposes such a tax.
Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221021</id>
	<title>Slope this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244210220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either legislators are weak, corrupt, or ignorant, or legislative government is a failure because it is inherently flawed. Pick from those two or shut up. There is no "slippery slope".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either legislators are weak , corrupt , or ignorant , or legislative government is a failure because it is inherently flawed .
Pick from those two or shut up .
There is no " slippery slope " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either legislators are weak, corrupt, or ignorant, or legislative government is a failure because it is inherently flawed.
Pick from those two or shut up.
There is no "slippery slope".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224911</id>
	<title>Isn't this an illegal tax?</title>
	<author>yawn9</author>
	<datestamp>1244226180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought this kind of tax was prevented by federal legislation.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_Tax\_Nondiscrimination\_Act" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_Tax\_Nondiscrimination\_Act</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought this kind of tax was prevented by federal legislation .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet \ _Tax \ _Nondiscrimination \ _Act [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought this kind of tax was prevented by federal legislation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet\_Tax\_Nondiscrimination\_Act [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224289</id>
	<title>Re:Okay, and....?</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1244223720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the other replier said, though, he was much more polite than I would expect.  (you didn't get a "ZOMG!!!1! It's a regressive tax!!!1!")</p><p>To address that, there are remedies built into the "fair tax" bill that Rep. John Linder introduces every session of Congress.  It involves sending a tax rebate to every single person every single month (ick.).  It's a big part of why I don't support a sales tax-based system.  Would much prefer large deduction flat tax.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the other replier said , though , he was much more polite than I would expect .
( you did n't get a " ZOMG ! ! ! 1 !
It 's a regressive tax ! ! ! 1 !
" ) To address that , there are remedies built into the " fair tax " bill that Rep. John Linder introduces every session of Congress .
It involves sending a tax rebate to every single person every single month ( ick. ) .
It 's a big part of why I do n't support a sales tax-based system .
Would much prefer large deduction flat tax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the other replier said, though, he was much more polite than I would expect.
(you didn't get a "ZOMG!!!1!
It's a regressive tax!!!1!
")To address that, there are remedies built into the "fair tax" bill that Rep. John Linder introduces every session of Congress.
It involves sending a tax rebate to every single person every single month (ick.).
It's a big part of why I don't support a sales tax-based system.
Would much prefer large deduction flat tax.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223167</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222131</id>
	<title>AKA The Dateline Tax</title>
	<author>Alzheimers</author>
	<datestamp>1244215680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi, I'm Chris Hansen. I'm here to collect your taxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi , I 'm Chris Hansen .
I 'm here to collect your taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi, I'm Chris Hansen.
I'm here to collect your taxes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220789</id>
	<title>Whoa whoa whoa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't say that having Gov. Bobby Jindal on our side is necessarily "good news."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't say that having Gov .
Bobby Jindal on our side is necessarily " good news .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't say that having Gov.
Bobby Jindal on our side is necessarily "good news.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220751</id>
	<title>Use</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1244208360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank goodness legislatures have the discipline to only use funds for the reason they gave in the justification.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank goodness legislatures have the discipline to only use funds for the reason they gave in the justification .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank goodness legislatures have the discipline to only use funds for the reason they gave in the justification.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224375</id>
	<title>keep out of the reach of children</title>
	<author>maxwells\_deamon</author>
	<datestamp>1244224080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Children are dangerous.  There are signs everywhere that say "Keep out of the reach of children".  There must be a reason for these signs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Children are dangerous .
There are signs everywhere that say " Keep out of the reach of children " .
There must be a reason for these signs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Children are dangerous.
There are signs everywhere that say "Keep out of the reach of children".
There must be a reason for these signs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221663</id>
	<title>Re:In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>cbiltcliffe</author>
	<datestamp>1244213400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While you are worry about US$ 0.15/mo. We in Brazil need to worry about 40\%, that's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.</p><p>I wish I could pay US$ 0.15 in taxes.</p></div><p>Yeah, but at least you have good beer....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While you are worry about US $ 0.15/mo .
We in Brazil need to worry about 40 \ % , that 's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.I wish I could pay US $ 0.15 in taxes.Yeah , but at least you have good beer... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you are worry about US$ 0.15/mo.
We in Brazil need to worry about 40\%, that's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.I wish I could pay US$ 0.15 in taxes.Yeah, but at least you have good beer....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220741</id>
	<title>even fuller disclosure:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Whenever I watch a movie trailer, I think of Don LaFontaine and when I think about Don I get a hard on that won't quit.</p><p>Ten years ago,I worked in what was once my Grandfather's movie studio. Gramps had died a year earlier and Grandma, now in her seventies had been forced to sell to the competition. I got a job with the new owners and mostly worked the soud studio by myself. That summer, they hired a man to help with the trailer.</p><p>Don always looked like he was three days from a shave and his whiskers were dirty white under the brim of his battered felt fedora.</p><p>He did not chew tobacco but the corners of his mouth turned down in a way that, at any moment, I expected a trickle of thin, brown juice to creep down his chin. His bushy, brown eyebrows shaded pale, gray eyes.</p><p>Dirty Don, he extended his hand, lifted his leg like a dog about to mark a bush and let go the loudest fart I ever heard. The old man winked at me. "Don LaFontaine is the name and playing pecker's my game.</p><p>I thought he said, "Checkers." I was nineteen, green as grass. I said, "I was never much good at that game."</p><p>"Now me," said Don, "I just love jumping men. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."</p><p>"I'll bet you do."</p><p>". . . and grabbing on to their peckers," said Don.</p><p>"I though we were talking about. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."</p><p>"You like jumping old men's peckers?"</p><p>I shook my head.</p><p>"I reckon we'll have to remedy that." Don lifted his right leg and let go another tremendous fart. "He said, "We best be getting to work."</p><p>That summer of 1999 was a more innocent time. I learned most of the sex I knew from those little eight pager cartoon booklets of comic-page characters going at it. Young men read them in the privacy of the bathroom, played with themselves, by themselves and didn't brag about it. Sometimes, we got off with a trusted friend and helped each other out.</p><p>Under the stage lights, the temperature some times climbed over the hundred degree mark. I had worked stripped to the waist since April and was as brown as a berry. On only his second day on the job and in the middle of August, Don wore old fashioned overalls. Those and socks in his hightop work shoes was every stitch he wore. When he bent forward, the bib front billowed out and I could see the white curly hairs on his chest and belly.</p><p>"Me? I just love to eat pussy!" Don licked his lips from corner to corner then stuck it out far enough that the tip could touch the tip of his nose. He said, A man's not a man till he knows first hand, the flavor of a lady's pussy."</p><p>"People do that?"</p><p>He winked. "Of course the taste of a hard cock ain't to be sneezed at neither. Now you answer me, yes or no. Does a man's cock taste salty or not?"</p><p>"I never. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>."</p><p>"Well, Dirty Don's willing to let you find out."</p><p>"No way."</p><p>"Just teasing," said Don. "But don't give me no sass or I'll show you my ass." He winked. Might show it to you anyway, if you was to ask."</p><p>"Why would I do that?"</p><p>"Curiousity, maybe. I'm guessing you never had a good piece of man ass."</p><p>"I'm no queer."</p><p>"Now don't be getting judgemental. Enjoying what's at hand ain't being queer. It's taking pleasure where you find it with anybody willing." Don slipped a handside the side slit of his overalls and I could tell he was fondling and straightening out his cock. Now I admit I got me a hole that satisfied a few guys."</p><p>I swallowed, hard.</p><p>Don winked. "Care to be asshole buddies?"</p><p>***</p><p>We worked steadily until noon. Don drew a worn pocket watch from the bib pocket of his loose overalls and croaked, "Bean time. But first its time to reel out our limber hoses and make with the golden arches before lunch."</p><p>I followed I ke to the end of the recording studio where he stopped at the outside wall of the utility shed. He opened his fly, fished inside, and finger-hooked a soft white penis with a pouting foreskin puckered half an inch past the hidden head.</p><p>"Yes sir," breathed Don, "this old peter ne</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever I watch a movie trailer , I think of Don LaFontaine and when I think about Don I get a hard on that wo n't quit.Ten years ago,I worked in what was once my Grandfather 's movie studio .
Gramps had died a year earlier and Grandma , now in her seventies had been forced to sell to the competition .
I got a job with the new owners and mostly worked the soud studio by myself .
That summer , they hired a man to help with the trailer.Don always looked like he was three days from a shave and his whiskers were dirty white under the brim of his battered felt fedora.He did not chew tobacco but the corners of his mouth turned down in a way that , at any moment , I expected a trickle of thin , brown juice to creep down his chin .
His bushy , brown eyebrows shaded pale , gray eyes.Dirty Don , he extended his hand , lifted his leg like a dog about to mark a bush and let go the loudest fart I ever heard .
The old man winked at me .
" Don LaFontaine is the name and playing pecker 's my game.I thought he said , " Checkers .
" I was nineteen , green as grass .
I said , " I was never much good at that game .
" " Now me , " said Don , " I just love jumping men .
. .
" " I 'll bet you do. " " .
. .
and grabbing on to their peckers , " said Don .
" I though we were talking about .
. .
" " You like jumping old men 's peckers ?
" I shook my head .
" I reckon we 'll have to remedy that .
" Don lifted his right leg and let go another tremendous fart .
" He said , " We best be getting to work .
" That summer of 1999 was a more innocent time .
I learned most of the sex I knew from those little eight pager cartoon booklets of comic-page characters going at it .
Young men read them in the privacy of the bathroom , played with themselves , by themselves and did n't brag about it .
Sometimes , we got off with a trusted friend and helped each other out.Under the stage lights , the temperature some times climbed over the hundred degree mark .
I had worked stripped to the waist since April and was as brown as a berry .
On only his second day on the job and in the middle of August , Don wore old fashioned overalls .
Those and socks in his hightop work shoes was every stitch he wore .
When he bent forward , the bib front billowed out and I could see the white curly hairs on his chest and belly. " Me ?
I just love to eat pussy !
" Don licked his lips from corner to corner then stuck it out far enough that the tip could touch the tip of his nose .
He said , A man 's not a man till he knows first hand , the flavor of a lady 's pussy .
" " People do that ?
" He winked .
" Of course the taste of a hard cock ai n't to be sneezed at neither .
Now you answer me , yes or no .
Does a man 's cock taste salty or not ?
" " I never .
. .
" " Well , Dirty Don 's willing to let you find out .
" " No way .
" " Just teasing , " said Don .
" But do n't give me no sass or I 'll show you my ass .
" He winked .
Might show it to you anyway , if you was to ask .
" " Why would I do that ?
" " Curiousity , maybe .
I 'm guessing you never had a good piece of man ass .
" " I 'm no queer .
" " Now do n't be getting judgemental .
Enjoying what 's at hand ai n't being queer .
It 's taking pleasure where you find it with anybody willing .
" Don slipped a handside the side slit of his overalls and I could tell he was fondling and straightening out his cock .
Now I admit I got me a hole that satisfied a few guys .
" I swallowed , hard.Don winked .
" Care to be asshole buddies ?
" * * * We worked steadily until noon .
Don drew a worn pocket watch from the bib pocket of his loose overalls and croaked , " Bean time .
But first its time to reel out our limber hoses and make with the golden arches before lunch .
" I followed I ke to the end of the recording studio where he stopped at the outside wall of the utility shed .
He opened his fly , fished inside , and finger-hooked a soft white penis with a pouting foreskin puckered half an inch past the hidden head .
" Yes sir , " breathed Don , " this old peter ne</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Whenever I watch a movie trailer, I think of Don LaFontaine and when I think about Don I get a hard on that won't quit.Ten years ago,I worked in what was once my Grandfather's movie studio.
Gramps had died a year earlier and Grandma, now in her seventies had been forced to sell to the competition.
I got a job with the new owners and mostly worked the soud studio by myself.
That summer, they hired a man to help with the trailer.Don always looked like he was three days from a shave and his whiskers were dirty white under the brim of his battered felt fedora.He did not chew tobacco but the corners of his mouth turned down in a way that, at any moment, I expected a trickle of thin, brown juice to creep down his chin.
His bushy, brown eyebrows shaded pale, gray eyes.Dirty Don, he extended his hand, lifted his leg like a dog about to mark a bush and let go the loudest fart I ever heard.
The old man winked at me.
"Don LaFontaine is the name and playing pecker's my game.I thought he said, "Checkers.
" I was nineteen, green as grass.
I said, "I was never much good at that game.
""Now me," said Don, "I just love jumping men.
. .
""I'll bet you do."".
. .
and grabbing on to their peckers," said Don.
"I though we were talking about.
. .
""You like jumping old men's peckers?
"I shook my head.
"I reckon we'll have to remedy that.
" Don lifted his right leg and let go another tremendous fart.
"He said, "We best be getting to work.
"That summer of 1999 was a more innocent time.
I learned most of the sex I knew from those little eight pager cartoon booklets of comic-page characters going at it.
Young men read them in the privacy of the bathroom, played with themselves, by themselves and didn't brag about it.
Sometimes, we got off with a trusted friend and helped each other out.Under the stage lights, the temperature some times climbed over the hundred degree mark.
I had worked stripped to the waist since April and was as brown as a berry.
On only his second day on the job and in the middle of August, Don wore old fashioned overalls.
Those and socks in his hightop work shoes was every stitch he wore.
When he bent forward, the bib front billowed out and I could see the white curly hairs on his chest and belly."Me?
I just love to eat pussy!
" Don licked his lips from corner to corner then stuck it out far enough that the tip could touch the tip of his nose.
He said, A man's not a man till he knows first hand, the flavor of a lady's pussy.
""People do that?
"He winked.
"Of course the taste of a hard cock ain't to be sneezed at neither.
Now you answer me, yes or no.
Does a man's cock taste salty or not?
""I never.
. .
""Well, Dirty Don's willing to let you find out.
""No way.
""Just teasing," said Don.
"But don't give me no sass or I'll show you my ass.
" He winked.
Might show it to you anyway, if you was to ask.
""Why would I do that?
""Curiousity, maybe.
I'm guessing you never had a good piece of man ass.
""I'm no queer.
""Now don't be getting judgemental.
Enjoying what's at hand ain't being queer.
It's taking pleasure where you find it with anybody willing.
" Don slipped a handside the side slit of his overalls and I could tell he was fondling and straightening out his cock.
Now I admit I got me a hole that satisfied a few guys.
"I swallowed, hard.Don winked.
"Care to be asshole buddies?
"***We worked steadily until noon.
Don drew a worn pocket watch from the bib pocket of his loose overalls and croaked, "Bean time.
But first its time to reel out our limber hoses and make with the golden arches before lunch.
"I followed I ke to the end of the recording studio where he stopped at the outside wall of the utility shed.
He opened his fly, fished inside, and finger-hooked a soft white penis with a pouting foreskin puckered half an inch past the hidden head.
"Yes sir," breathed Don, "this old peter ne</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229027</id>
	<title>What slippery slope?</title>
	<author>SoftwareArtist</author>
	<datestamp>1244207040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, every other form of communications already has taxes and surcharges on it.  Take a look at your phone bill some time and see if you can figure out what all the different items on it really are.
<br> <br>
If you object to paying an extra 15 cents per month, just say so.  If you don't think this is the best way for the government to spend that money, say so.  But don't call it a slippery slope when it's nothing of the sort.  It's just putting internet access into the same category as cell phone, land line, cable, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , every other form of communications already has taxes and surcharges on it .
Take a look at your phone bill some time and see if you can figure out what all the different items on it really are .
If you object to paying an extra 15 cents per month , just say so .
If you do n't think this is the best way for the government to spend that money , say so .
But do n't call it a slippery slope when it 's nothing of the sort .
It 's just putting internet access into the same category as cell phone , land line , cable , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, every other form of communications already has taxes and surcharges on it.
Take a look at your phone bill some time and see if you can figure out what all the different items on it really are.
If you object to paying an extra 15 cents per month, just say so.
If you don't think this is the best way for the government to spend that money, say so.
But don't call it a slippery slope when it's nothing of the sort.
It's just putting internet access into the same category as cell phone, land line, cable, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222811</id>
	<title>Ahh, the old stand-by</title>
	<author>Morphine007</author>
	<datestamp>1244218380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This argument seems to be trotted out more and more these days:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"I don't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children's protection," said Rep. Simone Champagne, D-Jeanerette.</p></div><p>I don't even know Simone, but I think I'd like to punch them in the face a few times.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This argument seems to be trotted out more and more these days : " I do n't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children 's protection , " said Rep. Simone Champagne , D-Jeanerette.I do n't even know Simone , but I think I 'd like to punch them in the face a few times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This argument seems to be trotted out more and more these days:"I don't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children's protection," said Rep. Simone Champagne, D-Jeanerette.I don't even know Simone, but I think I'd like to punch them in the face a few times.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221099</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1244210700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahem.  Yes, I'll have to agree.  You're confused.  Any tax fund, no matter what purpose it was intended for, is subject to raiding by the politicos.  Not very many years ago, Social Security had a nice little surplus.  Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age.  But, SS was actually showing a surplus, temporarily.  Instead of re-investing those few billions, the politicos cast their greedy eyes on all that money, and passed new laws, entirely contrary to pre-existing law, so that they could pilfer that surplus.  You can bet both cheeks of your arse that if politicians care that little about voting old people, they don't really give a damn about non-voting young people.</p><p>People are suckers, politicians know it, and they pull the heart strings whichever is necessary to rob us.</p><p>Besides which - the law sets bad precedent, even if they really DID use the money for children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahem .
Yes , I 'll have to agree .
You 're confused .
Any tax fund , no matter what purpose it was intended for , is subject to raiding by the politicos .
Not very many years ago , Social Security had a nice little surplus .
Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age .
But , SS was actually showing a surplus , temporarily .
Instead of re-investing those few billions , the politicos cast their greedy eyes on all that money , and passed new laws , entirely contrary to pre-existing law , so that they could pilfer that surplus .
You can bet both cheeks of your arse that if politicians care that little about voting old people , they do n't really give a damn about non-voting young people.People are suckers , politicians know it , and they pull the heart strings whichever is necessary to rob us.Besides which - the law sets bad precedent , even if they really DID use the money for children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahem.
Yes, I'll have to agree.
You're confused.
Any tax fund, no matter what purpose it was intended for, is subject to raiding by the politicos.
Not very many years ago, Social Security had a nice little surplus.
Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age.
But, SS was actually showing a surplus, temporarily.
Instead of re-investing those few billions, the politicos cast their greedy eyes on all that money, and passed new laws, entirely contrary to pre-existing law, so that they could pilfer that surplus.
You can bet both cheeks of your arse that if politicians care that little about voting old people, they don't really give a damn about non-voting young people.People are suckers, politicians know it, and they pull the heart strings whichever is necessary to rob us.Besides which - the law sets bad precedent, even if they really DID use the money for children.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220993</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tend to agree with you there, there are so many more prominent situations across the board we could defer our resources to, however, children should not be completely put off to the side, everything is parallel, so to is the p0rn on the web...if you turn away for 2 seconds you fall so far behind playing catch up, you won't be able to catch them properly for another few years after you start again....</p><p>I believe there should be an overall committee, which has 3 sub division, fraud/identity theft, child p0rn, and virus/worm/spam divisions. These would each have there own budgets decreed by higher up management, and also<br>correlating to their importance to one another, but sharing tactics and technologies to better make use of resources.</p><p>Also, just because we spend 1 billion dollars on child p0rn to catch those implicated, does not mean we will get more caught, it just means the chances should be greater. It all depends on how the money is spent and where, I think before giving any more money to any of these organizations, we should see where they will spend the money , sort of like a business plan, open for review by a few high class security experts, that can see the big picture....sometimes a lot of the people in these orgs, don't really know the firs thing about technology advances, even though they mean well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with you there , there are so many more prominent situations across the board we could defer our resources to , however , children should not be completely put off to the side , everything is parallel , so to is the p0rn on the web...if you turn away for 2 seconds you fall so far behind playing catch up , you wo n't be able to catch them properly for another few years after you start again....I believe there should be an overall committee , which has 3 sub division , fraud/identity theft , child p0rn , and virus/worm/spam divisions .
These would each have there own budgets decreed by higher up management , and alsocorrelating to their importance to one another , but sharing tactics and technologies to better make use of resources.Also , just because we spend 1 billion dollars on child p0rn to catch those implicated , does not mean we will get more caught , it just means the chances should be greater .
It all depends on how the money is spent and where , I think before giving any more money to any of these organizations , we should see where they will spend the money , sort of like a business plan , open for review by a few high class security experts , that can see the big picture....sometimes a lot of the people in these orgs , do n't really know the firs thing about technology advances , even though they mean well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with you there, there are so many more prominent situations across the board we could defer our resources to, however, children should not be completely put off to the side, everything is parallel, so to is the p0rn on the web...if you turn away for 2 seconds you fall so far behind playing catch up, you won't be able to catch them properly for another few years after you start again....I believe there should be an overall committee, which has 3 sub division, fraud/identity theft, child p0rn, and virus/worm/spam divisions.
These would each have there own budgets decreed by higher up management, and alsocorrelating to their importance to one another, but sharing tactics and technologies to better make use of resources.Also, just because we spend 1 billion dollars on child p0rn to catch those implicated, does not mean we will get more caught, it just means the chances should be greater.
It all depends on how the money is spent and where, I think before giving any more money to any of these organizations, we should see where they will spend the money , sort of like a business plan, open for review by a few high class security experts, that can see the big picture....sometimes a lot of the people in these orgs, don't really know the firs thing about technology advances, even though they mean well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226163</id>
	<title>Typo</title>
	<author>xate</author>
	<datestamp>1244231880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They must have meant "to fight online activity"</htmltext>
<tokenext>They must have meant " to fight online activity "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They must have meant "to fight online activity"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221697</id>
	<title>Re:HAHAHA!</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1244213520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flamebait? Wow, looks like Republicans have mod points. Of course, you could have as easily said "Coroprationist blue", because the Democrats are just as much in the pockets of the corporations as the Republicans. When you have only two viable parties and it's legal to donate to both candidates in any election, and you don't even have to be eligible to vote for them, your vote doesn't mean very much. What would you expect?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flamebait ?
Wow , looks like Republicans have mod points .
Of course , you could have as easily said " Coroprationist blue " , because the Democrats are just as much in the pockets of the corporations as the Republicans .
When you have only two viable parties and it 's legal to donate to both candidates in any election , and you do n't even have to be eligible to vote for them , your vote does n't mean very much .
What would you expect ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flamebait?
Wow, looks like Republicans have mod points.
Of course, you could have as easily said "Coroprationist blue", because the Democrats are just as much in the pockets of the corporations as the Republicans.
When you have only two viable parties and it's legal to donate to both candidates in any election, and you don't even have to be eligible to vote for them, your vote doesn't mean very much.
What would you expect?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28227027</id>
	<title>I just love how this sounds.</title>
	<author>blakedev</author>
	<datestamp>1244193000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The measure would raise $2.4 million a year for Caldwell's department, according to a financial analysis."

I am also a Louisiana native, and a lot of us know that if Louisiana politicians are pushing for something, then it means that they'll benefit from it in some way. One guy even proposed a tax incentive for people who have children in private schools because he felt that private schooling was a tad too expensive for him. And about the time that Governor Jindal was elected, they were trying to give themselves another raise.
I honestly thought that Jindal would be a bitch to the politicians, and he seemed like it at first, but he came around. I don't agree with him on social issues, but I am glad that he opposes this.

I'm willing to bet that at least some of that $2.4M will not go towards the department.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The measure would raise $ 2.4 million a year for Caldwell 's department , according to a financial analysis .
" I am also a Louisiana native , and a lot of us know that if Louisiana politicians are pushing for something , then it means that they 'll benefit from it in some way .
One guy even proposed a tax incentive for people who have children in private schools because he felt that private schooling was a tad too expensive for him .
And about the time that Governor Jindal was elected , they were trying to give themselves another raise .
I honestly thought that Jindal would be a bitch to the politicians , and he seemed like it at first , but he came around .
I do n't agree with him on social issues , but I am glad that he opposes this .
I 'm willing to bet that at least some of that $ 2.4M will not go towards the department .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The measure would raise $2.4 million a year for Caldwell's department, according to a financial analysis.
"

I am also a Louisiana native, and a lot of us know that if Louisiana politicians are pushing for something, then it means that they'll benefit from it in some way.
One guy even proposed a tax incentive for people who have children in private schools because he felt that private schooling was a tad too expensive for him.
And about the time that Governor Jindal was elected, they were trying to give themselves another raise.
I honestly thought that Jindal would be a bitch to the politicians, and he seemed like it at first, but he came around.
I don't agree with him on social issues, but I am glad that he opposes this.
I'm willing to bet that at least some of that $2.4M will not go towards the department.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223813</id>
	<title>Wouldn't surprise if already taxed in many areas</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244221980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get taxed on my phone.  I get taxed on my energy bill.  I get taxed on my trash bill.  These range from about $5 a month to less than $1.  I don't think I get taxed on my internet service, but I find this concept so unremarkable that I went around looking for my latest bill to check.  (Couldn't find it...)</p><p>Bottom line: City, county, state, and federal taxes are levied on many forms of communication.  These taxes are relatively low and I don't think we should freak out about them.</p><p>Also the fact that the summary says anything good about Gov. Jindal tells you something about the submitter's priorities.  Allow me to summarize what I know about Mr. Jindal:</p><ul><li>Republicans have been saying for a long time now how great he is and how he's the next Obama.</li><li>So when he gave that big speech/rebuttal of Obama's speech, I figured maybe there's something to this, and had a listen.  He followed Obama's masterful, nuanced, eloquent speech with a very shallow analysis of the country's problems.  What's more, he addressed his audience as if it was a class of 5th graders.  Fail.</li><li>The stimulus package potentially offered him truckloads of free money.  This is a politician's dream.  While he claimed to deny this money out of principle, if you're properly cynical about politics and informed how it works in the US, you know that he did this to be better positioned in a primary in 2012.  Result?  In his state there will be fewer roads and schools build.  (Do you know where Louisiana ranks in education?  How about, uh, some federal money for rebuilding New Orleans, which is still said to be in bad shape?  Oh, those aren't the things that will get people voting for Jindal...)</li></ul><p>So, when anybody says "it's a good thing Bobby Jindal..."  I'm sorry, but I have to immediately discount that person as an idiot.  I read my fair share about politics, and everything this guy does seems to have the taint of a slimy, crappy politician of the worst variety.  And it never strikes me of having any sincerity, at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get taxed on my phone .
I get taxed on my energy bill .
I get taxed on my trash bill .
These range from about $ 5 a month to less than $ 1 .
I do n't think I get taxed on my internet service , but I find this concept so unremarkable that I went around looking for my latest bill to check .
( Could n't find it... ) Bottom line : City , county , state , and federal taxes are levied on many forms of communication .
These taxes are relatively low and I do n't think we should freak out about them.Also the fact that the summary says anything good about Gov .
Jindal tells you something about the submitter 's priorities .
Allow me to summarize what I know about Mr. Jindal : Republicans have been saying for a long time now how great he is and how he 's the next Obama.So when he gave that big speech/rebuttal of Obama 's speech , I figured maybe there 's something to this , and had a listen .
He followed Obama 's masterful , nuanced , eloquent speech with a very shallow analysis of the country 's problems .
What 's more , he addressed his audience as if it was a class of 5th graders .
Fail.The stimulus package potentially offered him truckloads of free money .
This is a politician 's dream .
While he claimed to deny this money out of principle , if you 're properly cynical about politics and informed how it works in the US , you know that he did this to be better positioned in a primary in 2012 .
Result ? In his state there will be fewer roads and schools build .
( Do you know where Louisiana ranks in education ?
How about , uh , some federal money for rebuilding New Orleans , which is still said to be in bad shape ?
Oh , those are n't the things that will get people voting for Jindal... ) So , when anybody says " it 's a good thing Bobby Jindal... " I 'm sorry , but I have to immediately discount that person as an idiot .
I read my fair share about politics , and everything this guy does seems to have the taint of a slimy , crappy politician of the worst variety .
And it never strikes me of having any sincerity , at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get taxed on my phone.
I get taxed on my energy bill.
I get taxed on my trash bill.
These range from about $5 a month to less than $1.
I don't think I get taxed on my internet service, but I find this concept so unremarkable that I went around looking for my latest bill to check.
(Couldn't find it...)Bottom line: City, county, state, and federal taxes are levied on many forms of communication.
These taxes are relatively low and I don't think we should freak out about them.Also the fact that the summary says anything good about Gov.
Jindal tells you something about the submitter's priorities.
Allow me to summarize what I know about Mr. Jindal:Republicans have been saying for a long time now how great he is and how he's the next Obama.So when he gave that big speech/rebuttal of Obama's speech, I figured maybe there's something to this, and had a listen.
He followed Obama's masterful, nuanced, eloquent speech with a very shallow analysis of the country's problems.
What's more, he addressed his audience as if it was a class of 5th graders.
Fail.The stimulus package potentially offered him truckloads of free money.
This is a politician's dream.
While he claimed to deny this money out of principle, if you're properly cynical about politics and informed how it works in the US, you know that he did this to be better positioned in a primary in 2012.
Result?  In his state there will be fewer roads and schools build.
(Do you know where Louisiana ranks in education?
How about, uh, some federal money for rebuilding New Orleans, which is still said to be in bad shape?
Oh, those aren't the things that will get people voting for Jindal...)So, when anybody says "it's a good thing Bobby Jindal..."  I'm sorry, but I have to immediately discount that person as an idiot.
I read my fair share about politics, and everything this guy does seems to have the taint of a slimy, crappy politician of the worst variety.
And it never strikes me of having any sincerity, at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226453</id>
	<title>Re:They shoud make it a dollar</title>
	<author>ae1294</author>
	<datestamp>1244233260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and have it go into education.<br>The more you educate a society, the fewer crimes that occur. Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool.</p></div><p>Here in NC the state just cut teachers pay and fired a few thousand teachers.<br>Next year my wife's 4th grade class size will increase from 23 to 33+ kids and each of her pay checks will be $100 less...</p><p>That whole thing about lotto money going to education or taxes going to education is a lie. The money gets redirected to pay anyone and everyone except for the people who teach and cleanup after the children.</p><p>Heck they shut off the Air Conditioning in the schools exactly when the kids leave and refuse to turn it on in the first place unless the temperature outside falls below some set limit regardless of the temperature inside a building... (this is all controlled at county office not each school building) A number of custodians have died here in Asheville due to heat stroke just to save a few bucks. You would never believe just how insanely bad it really is unless you got to see it first hand.</p><p><b>The moral of this story is Public Education is unimportant to politicians because it's not their kids...<br>See for yourself: <a href="http://www.ncae.org/" title="ncae.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncae.org/</a> [ncae.org] </b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and have it go into education.The more you educate a society , the fewer crimes that occur .
Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool.Here in NC the state just cut teachers pay and fired a few thousand teachers.Next year my wife 's 4th grade class size will increase from 23 to 33 + kids and each of her pay checks will be $ 100 less...That whole thing about lotto money going to education or taxes going to education is a lie .
The money gets redirected to pay anyone and everyone except for the people who teach and cleanup after the children.Heck they shut off the Air Conditioning in the schools exactly when the kids leave and refuse to turn it on in the first place unless the temperature outside falls below some set limit regardless of the temperature inside a building... ( this is all controlled at county office not each school building ) A number of custodians have died here in Asheville due to heat stroke just to save a few bucks .
You would never believe just how insanely bad it really is unless you got to see it first hand.The moral of this story is Public Education is unimportant to politicians because it 's not their kids...See for yourself : http : //www.ncae.org/ [ ncae.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and have it go into education.The more you educate a society, the fewer crimes that occur.
Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool.Here in NC the state just cut teachers pay and fired a few thousand teachers.Next year my wife's 4th grade class size will increase from 23 to 33+ kids and each of her pay checks will be $100 less...That whole thing about lotto money going to education or taxes going to education is a lie.
The money gets redirected to pay anyone and everyone except for the people who teach and cleanup after the children.Heck they shut off the Air Conditioning in the schools exactly when the kids leave and refuse to turn it on in the first place unless the temperature outside falls below some set limit regardless of the temperature inside a building... (this is all controlled at county office not each school building) A number of custodians have died here in Asheville due to heat stroke just to save a few bucks.
You would never believe just how insanely bad it really is unless you got to see it first hand.The moral of this story is Public Education is unimportant to politicians because it's not their kids...See for yourself: http://www.ncae.org/ [ncae.org] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223143</id>
	<title>New Taxes arrrrrrr GREAT!</title>
	<author>ae1294</author>
	<datestamp>1244219580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next month we will be purposing a new TCP/IP packet tax but it's only 1 cent so don't worry just keep downloading those idol episodes...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next month we will be purposing a new TCP/IP packet tax but it 's only 1 cent so do n't worry just keep downloading those idol episodes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next month we will be purposing a new TCP/IP packet tax but it's only 1 cent so don't worry just keep downloading those idol episodes...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220861</id>
	<title>My Thoughts Exactly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Can you say 'slippery slope?'</p></div><p>Can you say 'boy who cried wolf'?</p><p>When we complain about $1.80 per year we not only distract attention from real issues, but we also discredit any future complaints we might have. What kind of person overlooks the massive amount of money we ship off to the likes of China and Saudi Arabia but can't tolerate even the smallest trickle of cash to our own government?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : Can you say 'slippery slope ?
'Can you say 'boy who cried wolf ' ? When we complain about $ 1.80 per year we not only distract attention from real issues , but we also discredit any future complaints we might have .
What kind of person overlooks the massive amount of money we ship off to the likes of China and Saudi Arabia but ca n't tolerate even the smallest trickle of cash to our own government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary:Can you say 'slippery slope?
'Can you say 'boy who cried wolf'?When we complain about $1.80 per year we not only distract attention from real issues, but we also discredit any future complaints we might have.
What kind of person overlooks the massive amount of money we ship off to the likes of China and Saudi Arabia but can't tolerate even the smallest trickle of cash to our own government?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221191</id>
	<title>How it really works.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244211120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activity</p></div><p>Only here is how it really works.  If you're spending $10 million, from the general fund, on X  and now you have an extra $10 million specifically for X all that does is move the original $10 million back to the general fund.  You don't actually have to spend any more money on X but you've just increased your tax base.  You could even wait a year or so to move the original money back in the budget so as not to raise alarms.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activityOnly here is how it really works .
If you 're spending $ 10 million , from the general fund , on X and now you have an extra $ 10 million specifically for X all that does is move the original $ 10 million back to the general fund .
You do n't actually have to spend any more money on X but you 've just increased your tax base .
You could even wait a year or so to move the original money back in the budget so as not to raise alarms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>15-cent monthly surcharge should be levied on Internet access across Louisiana to fight online criminal activityOnly here is how it really works.
If you're spending $10 million, from the general fund, on X  and now you have an extra $10 million specifically for X all that does is move the original $10 million back to the general fund.
You don't actually have to spend any more money on X but you've just increased your tax base.
You could even wait a year or so to move the original money back in the budget so as not to raise alarms.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222843</id>
	<title>Re:"to fight online criminal activity"</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244218440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>News flash, it to pay for enforcement, not deter criminals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News flash , it to pay for enforcement , not deter criminals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News flash, it to pay for enforcement, not deter criminals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787</id>
	<title>HAHAHA!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red!<br> <br>Disclaimer: I'm not American.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red !
Disclaimer : I 'm not American .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red!
Disclaimer: I'm not American.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903</id>
	<title>Bad policy yes, slippery slope... not really.</title>
	<author>spiritraveller</author>
	<datestamp>1244209500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just another tax on something that shouldn't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles, water, gasoline, cheeseburgers, cable television, telephones, and almost everything else.</p><p>If you're worried about a slippery slope, please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.</p><p>It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting "online crime".  Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just another tax on something that should n't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles , water , gasoline , cheeseburgers , cable television , telephones , and almost everything else.If you 're worried about a slippery slope , please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting " online crime " .
Why do n't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the " shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just another tax on something that shouldn't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles, water, gasoline, cheeseburgers, cable television, telephones, and almost everything else.If you're worried about a slippery slope, please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting "online crime".
Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221327</id>
	<title>Reminds me of....</title>
	<author>uffe\_nordholm</author>
	<datestamp>1244211900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This reminds me, somehow, of Gudrun Schymann (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gudrun\_Schyman), a Swedish politician who proposed a special "man tax". This tax would be levied on all men, for their collective responsability for the physical abuse some women have to put up with from some men. When someone opined that since all men would have to pay this tax, beating your wife/girlfriend cannot be illegal, she shut up very fast and has not raised the subject since!
<br> <br>
As for the issue at hand, why should internet users be singled out for extra taxes? I have not yet heard of any car owners having to pay an extra tax to fund a police branch concerned with car theft. (At least here in Sweden a part of your vehicle taxes are used to provide the roads, the rest disappears into that black hole that is the Government budget, no mention of a special car theft police squad.) Or home owners having to pay a special tax to have a police force that takes care of home burglaries.
<br> <br>
Why is internet any different? Is it that the crimes can be spread over so many jurisdictions that makes it different? Or is it that the politicians are so stupid? I know what my answer is...</htmltext>
<tokenext>This reminds me , somehow , of Gudrun Schymann ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gudrun \ _Schyman ) , a Swedish politician who proposed a special " man tax " .
This tax would be levied on all men , for their collective responsability for the physical abuse some women have to put up with from some men .
When someone opined that since all men would have to pay this tax , beating your wife/girlfriend can not be illegal , she shut up very fast and has not raised the subject since !
As for the issue at hand , why should internet users be singled out for extra taxes ?
I have not yet heard of any car owners having to pay an extra tax to fund a police branch concerned with car theft .
( At least here in Sweden a part of your vehicle taxes are used to provide the roads , the rest disappears into that black hole that is the Government budget , no mention of a special car theft police squad .
) Or home owners having to pay a special tax to have a police force that takes care of home burglaries .
Why is internet any different ?
Is it that the crimes can be spread over so many jurisdictions that makes it different ?
Or is it that the politicians are so stupid ?
I know what my answer is.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This reminds me, somehow, of Gudrun Schymann (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gudrun\_Schyman), a Swedish politician who proposed a special "man tax".
This tax would be levied on all men, for their collective responsability for the physical abuse some women have to put up with from some men.
When someone opined that since all men would have to pay this tax, beating your wife/girlfriend cannot be illegal, she shut up very fast and has not raised the subject since!
As for the issue at hand, why should internet users be singled out for extra taxes?
I have not yet heard of any car owners having to pay an extra tax to fund a police branch concerned with car theft.
(At least here in Sweden a part of your vehicle taxes are used to provide the roads, the rest disappears into that black hole that is the Government budget, no mention of a special car theft police squad.
) Or home owners having to pay a special tax to have a police force that takes care of home burglaries.
Why is internet any different?
Is it that the crimes can be spread over so many jurisdictions that makes it different?
Or is it that the politicians are so stupid?
I know what my answer is...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221611</id>
	<title>Want some Candy little....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244213220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they should tax candy and nondescript vans with mirrored windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they should tax candy and nondescript vans with mirrored windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they should tax candy and nondescript vans with mirrored windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221789</id>
	<title>Wow!</title>
	<author>airship</author>
	<datestamp>1244213940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, this is unbelievable! Totally amazing!</p><p>Bobby Jindal is on the right side of an issue!  8O</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , this is unbelievable !
Totally amazing ! Bobby Jindal is on the right side of an issue !
8O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, this is unbelievable!
Totally amazing!Bobby Jindal is on the right side of an issue!
8O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221953</id>
	<title>I see a business oppportunity</title>
	<author>billybob\_jcv</author>
	<datestamp>1244214720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's say I run a wireless ISP with locations all along the Mississippi side of the river.  I just happen to have large antennas pointed across the river at N'awlins.  Officially, I am not providing internet service to Louisiana.  Unofficially, I don't bother to check the addresses of any of my customers - as long as they have a credit card, they get in...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's say I run a wireless ISP with locations all along the Mississippi side of the river .
I just happen to have large antennas pointed across the river at N'awlins .
Officially , I am not providing internet service to Louisiana .
Unofficially , I do n't bother to check the addresses of any of my customers - as long as they have a credit card , they get in.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's say I run a wireless ISP with locations all along the Mississippi side of the river.
I just happen to have large antennas pointed across the river at N'awlins.
Officially, I am not providing internet service to Louisiana.
Unofficially, I don't bother to check the addresses of any of my customers - as long as they have a credit card, they get in...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221051</id>
	<title>Public schools exempt...</title>
	<author>emocomputerjock</author>
	<datestamp>1244210400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How would this work for public wifi? Would you get charged an extra 15 cents on your tab when you pick up your coffee? What about waiting at the airport, would that be an extra 15 cents on your flight?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How would this work for public wifi ?
Would you get charged an extra 15 cents on your tab when you pick up your coffee ?
What about waiting at the airport , would that be an extra 15 cents on your flight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would this work for public wifi?
Would you get charged an extra 15 cents on your tab when you pick up your coffee?
What about waiting at the airport, would that be an extra 15 cents on your flight?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224735</id>
	<title>Re:Let's think about this a moment</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1244225400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It needs to be clearly understood that the whole concept of "law enforcement" on the Internet - or anything pertaining to the Internet - is pretty much useless unless there is global uniformity.  If child porn is legal in Thailand, how exactly do you prosecute someone distributing child porn from Thailand?  Simple answer, you don't.  Pick any crime and it is legal somewhere in the world today.  Yes, this includes murder - if you kill a Jew in Saudi Arabia or Indonesia exactly how hard do you think local law enforcement is going to work at solving the crime?  Same with credit card fraud in Moldavia.</p><p>That is the situation we have created and what we have to come to terms with.  You can bleat all you want about crime on the Internet, but it is pretty much pointless.  Without the ability to actually pursue criminals on a world-wide network, you can pretty much get away with anything.</p><p>So what possible good is collecting a tax for combating crime on the Internet?  Are they going to use the money to compensate victims of Ebay fraud?  How about Nigerian 419 scams?  Merchants that ship goods without first checking out a credit card?  I'd say most Internet crime happens with the victim's cooperation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It needs to be clearly understood that the whole concept of " law enforcement " on the Internet - or anything pertaining to the Internet - is pretty much useless unless there is global uniformity .
If child porn is legal in Thailand , how exactly do you prosecute someone distributing child porn from Thailand ?
Simple answer , you do n't .
Pick any crime and it is legal somewhere in the world today .
Yes , this includes murder - if you kill a Jew in Saudi Arabia or Indonesia exactly how hard do you think local law enforcement is going to work at solving the crime ?
Same with credit card fraud in Moldavia.That is the situation we have created and what we have to come to terms with .
You can bleat all you want about crime on the Internet , but it is pretty much pointless .
Without the ability to actually pursue criminals on a world-wide network , you can pretty much get away with anything.So what possible good is collecting a tax for combating crime on the Internet ?
Are they going to use the money to compensate victims of Ebay fraud ?
How about Nigerian 419 scams ?
Merchants that ship goods without first checking out a credit card ?
I 'd say most Internet crime happens with the victim 's cooperation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It needs to be clearly understood that the whole concept of "law enforcement" on the Internet - or anything pertaining to the Internet - is pretty much useless unless there is global uniformity.
If child porn is legal in Thailand, how exactly do you prosecute someone distributing child porn from Thailand?
Simple answer, you don't.
Pick any crime and it is legal somewhere in the world today.
Yes, this includes murder - if you kill a Jew in Saudi Arabia or Indonesia exactly how hard do you think local law enforcement is going to work at solving the crime?
Same with credit card fraud in Moldavia.That is the situation we have created and what we have to come to terms with.
You can bleat all you want about crime on the Internet, but it is pretty much pointless.
Without the ability to actually pursue criminals on a world-wide network, you can pretty much get away with anything.So what possible good is collecting a tax for combating crime on the Internet?
Are they going to use the money to compensate victims of Ebay fraud?
How about Nigerian 419 scams?
Merchants that ship goods without first checking out a credit card?
I'd say most Internet crime happens with the victim's cooperation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223141</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222673</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244217840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age. "</p><p>False. That is a lie that the republicansd have been spreading since it's inception.<br>You might want to read up on the people that actually study it for a living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age .
" False. That is a lie that the republicansd have been spreading since it 's inception.You might want to read up on the people that actually study it for a living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Everyone already knew that SS would be bankrupted when the baby boomers reached retirement age.
"False. That is a lie that the republicansd have been spreading since it's inception.You might want to read up on the people that actually study it for a living.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220809</id>
	<title>Rash?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Feel an itch?  You just got fucked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Feel an itch ?
You just got fucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Feel an itch?
You just got fucked.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226723</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1244234880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>BadAnalogyGuy, please don't <b>dilute</b> yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education.</p></div><p>I think the word you're looking for is "delude". You may have only heard it used and never seen it written properly. They are phonetically similar and "dilute" almost (but not quite) makes sense.</p><p>The rest shows signs of thought change mid-sentence: you want either "by thinking" or "please, you're deluding yourself and others if you think". That happens a lot, especially due to re-editing. It'll happen again; it still does to me on occasion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BadAnalogyGuy , please do n't dilute yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education.I think the word you 're looking for is " delude " .
You may have only heard it used and never seen it written properly .
They are phonetically similar and " dilute " almost ( but not quite ) makes sense.The rest shows signs of thought change mid-sentence : you want either " by thinking " or " please , you 're deluding yourself and others if you think " .
That happens a lot , especially due to re-editing .
It 'll happen again ; it still does to me on occasion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BadAnalogyGuy, please don't dilute yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education.I think the word you're looking for is "delude".
You may have only heard it used and never seen it written properly.
They are phonetically similar and "dilute" almost (but not quite) makes sense.The rest shows signs of thought change mid-sentence: you want either "by thinking" or "please, you're deluding yourself and others if you think".
That happens a lot, especially due to re-editing.
It'll happen again; it still does to me on occasion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223465</id>
	<title>runnin' on wet rocks</title>
	<author>lgb</author>
	<datestamp>1244220720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>author:  "Can you say 'slippery slope?'"

a baby mouse doesn't necessarily grow into an elephant

I am opposed to taxes, especially on internet access, but i am also opposed to that tired old "argument"</htmltext>
<tokenext>author : " Can you say 'slippery slope ?
' " a baby mouse does n't necessarily grow into an elephant I am opposed to taxes , especially on internet access , but i am also opposed to that tired old " argument "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>author:  "Can you say 'slippery slope?
'"

a baby mouse doesn't necessarily grow into an elephant

I am opposed to taxes, especially on internet access, but i am also opposed to that tired old "argument"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm sick and tired of thinking of the children, let's think about everybody for a while.</p></div><p>So you're saying that your anti-children?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order, you'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children. Like Internet Fraud and Identity Theft. How much money do people lose to things like that? Hint: A lot.</p></div><p>I dislike the term "Internet Fraud".  Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.</p><p>That aside, I think you're saying that if you cut down on other crimes conducted online, sex crimes conducted online will drop as a matter of course.  I tend to agree.</p><p>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sick and tired of thinking of the children , let 's think about everybody for a while.So you 're saying that your anti-children ?
: -PI agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order , you 'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children .
Like Internet Fraud and Identity Theft .
How much money do people lose to things like that ?
Hint : A lot.I dislike the term " Internet Fraud " .
Fraud is fraud , whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.That aside , I think you 're saying that if you cut down on other crimes conducted online , sex crimes conducted online will drop as a matter of course .
I tend to agree. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sick and tired of thinking of the children, let's think about everybody for a while.So you're saying that your anti-children?
:-PI agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order, you'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children.
Like Internet Fraud and Identity Theft.
How much money do people lose to things like that?
Hint: A lot.I dislike the term "Internet Fraud".
Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.That aside, I think you're saying that if you cut down on other crimes conducted online, sex crimes conducted online will drop as a matter of course.
I tend to agree..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221535</id>
	<title>No different</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see this as any different than any other tax. They tax cigarrettes to pay for health care, they tax gas to pay for roads. The whole "for the children" is just a political ploy and everyone knows it. I'm not saying that I approve or dissaprove of it, I'm simply saying that this isn't the huge slippery slope everyone thinks it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see this as any different than any other tax .
They tax cigarrettes to pay for health care , they tax gas to pay for roads .
The whole " for the children " is just a political ploy and everyone knows it .
I 'm not saying that I approve or dissaprove of it , I 'm simply saying that this is n't the huge slippery slope everyone thinks it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see this as any different than any other tax.
They tax cigarrettes to pay for health care, they tax gas to pay for roads.
The whole "for the children" is just a political ploy and everyone knows it.
I'm not saying that I approve or dissaprove of it, I'm simply saying that this isn't the huge slippery slope everyone thinks it is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222865</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Beat The Odds</author>
	<datestamp>1244218500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I dislike the term "Internet Fraud". Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.</p></div><p>I agree totally.</p><p>It also a lot like "hate crimes". Crime is crime. The "law" in the country has gotten completely idiotic.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dislike the term " Internet Fraud " .
Fraud is fraud , whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.I agree totally.It also a lot like " hate crimes " .
Crime is crime .
The " law " in the country has gotten completely idiotic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dislike the term "Internet Fraud".
Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.I agree totally.It also a lot like "hate crimes".
Crime is crime.
The "law" in the country has gotten completely idiotic.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222179</id>
	<title>Budget cutting legislature overlooks their salary</title>
	<author>LSU\_ADT\_Geek</author>
	<datestamp>1244215920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a LA native, it a crying shame that this is one of the measures the LA legislature is seeking to make up for state budget cuts while they sought to increase their salaries at the onset of the legislative session. <a href="http://www.la-par.org/PAR\%20News\%20Files/shreveporttimes\_06.13.08.pdf" title="la-par.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.la-par.org/PAR\%20News\%20Files/shreveporttimes\_06.13.08.pdf</a> [la-par.org]  I work at LSU and already dealing with the budget cuts from the state and now I am told they also want to tax me?!  This is complete bullshit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a LA native , it a crying shame that this is one of the measures the LA legislature is seeking to make up for state budget cuts while they sought to increase their salaries at the onset of the legislative session .
http : //www.la-par.org/PAR \ % 20News \ % 20Files/shreveporttimes \ _06.13.08.pdf [ la-par.org ] I work at LSU and already dealing with the budget cuts from the state and now I am told they also want to tax me ? !
This is complete bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a LA native, it a crying shame that this is one of the measures the LA legislature is seeking to make up for state budget cuts while they sought to increase their salaries at the onset of the legislative session.
http://www.la-par.org/PAR\%20News\%20Files/shreveporttimes\_06.13.08.pdf [la-par.org]  I work at LSU and already dealing with the budget cuts from the state and now I am told they also want to tax me?!
This is complete bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223141</id>
	<title>Let's think about this a moment</title>
	<author>HikingStick</author>
	<datestamp>1244219580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know that initial reactions tend to run along the lines of "There's no way they're going to tax my Internet access!", but let's give it some thought for a moment.
<br> <br>
The Internet has largely become similar to a public utility or similar public accommodation. [I realize that IANAL and that such terms have specific legal meanings, but allow me to continue to present my case.] While we may not always like it, most jurisdictions have the authority to collect fees, levees, or taxes to support administrative costs associated with certain public accomodations or utilities: there are fees for curb and gutter, lighting, sewer, water, and road maintenance.  "Wait", you say, "those are all items owned by the municipality.  Municipalities don't own the data cabling or the ISPs (in most cases)." True, but agents of government do collect taxes, fees, and other surcharges pertaining to telecommunications, certain entertainment venues, and who knows how many other things.
<br> <br>
In each of those cases (and yes, I acknowledge that many may argue that government does a poor job of what I will describe), the monies collected are used to provide various municipal or government services.  In some cases, the collected funds may be used for services or things directly related to the surcharge or fee for which the monies were collected (e.g. curb and gutter improvements), but in other cases the fees are used to support other administrative functions within a municipality (e.g., filing costs, police services, fire services). If a city sees an uptick in citizen consumption of specific services tied to specific activities (e.g., the number of fire calls relating to backyard fire pits), it only makes sense that the fees associated with the activity (e.g., burning permit, residential fire permit) would increase to help defray any increased costs (e.g., adding members to the fire squad, purchasing additional brush-fire mitigation gear).
<br> <br>
If, therefore, law enforcement agencies are finding more and more of their resources are being allocated to crimes or investigations that hinge on Internet usage, is it not reasonable for those agents of government to collect some minimal renumeration to defray their costs (e.g., investigators with the appropriate skils, computer forensic technologies)?
<br> <br>
I'm not proposing suggesting that such a path is without danger. Logically, however, it does seem reasonable.  My biggest concern would be that such government-imposed fees, taxes, and surcharges would grow to the level we see them in general telecommunications, or that they would be revised to be based on throughput used (data transfer volumes) rather than as a flat fee that applies to all users of the service.  So, yes, it is a slippery slope, but not one without merit or one to be dismissed without much dialogue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that initial reactions tend to run along the lines of " There 's no way they 're going to tax my Internet access !
" , but let 's give it some thought for a moment .
The Internet has largely become similar to a public utility or similar public accommodation .
[ I realize that IANAL and that such terms have specific legal meanings , but allow me to continue to present my case .
] While we may not always like it , most jurisdictions have the authority to collect fees , levees , or taxes to support administrative costs associated with certain public accomodations or utilities : there are fees for curb and gutter , lighting , sewer , water , and road maintenance .
" Wait " , you say , " those are all items owned by the municipality .
Municipalities do n't own the data cabling or the ISPs ( in most cases ) .
" True , but agents of government do collect taxes , fees , and other surcharges pertaining to telecommunications , certain entertainment venues , and who knows how many other things .
In each of those cases ( and yes , I acknowledge that many may argue that government does a poor job of what I will describe ) , the monies collected are used to provide various municipal or government services .
In some cases , the collected funds may be used for services or things directly related to the surcharge or fee for which the monies were collected ( e.g .
curb and gutter improvements ) , but in other cases the fees are used to support other administrative functions within a municipality ( e.g. , filing costs , police services , fire services ) .
If a city sees an uptick in citizen consumption of specific services tied to specific activities ( e.g. , the number of fire calls relating to backyard fire pits ) , it only makes sense that the fees associated with the activity ( e.g. , burning permit , residential fire permit ) would increase to help defray any increased costs ( e.g. , adding members to the fire squad , purchasing additional brush-fire mitigation gear ) .
If , therefore , law enforcement agencies are finding more and more of their resources are being allocated to crimes or investigations that hinge on Internet usage , is it not reasonable for those agents of government to collect some minimal renumeration to defray their costs ( e.g. , investigators with the appropriate skils , computer forensic technologies ) ?
I 'm not proposing suggesting that such a path is without danger .
Logically , however , it does seem reasonable .
My biggest concern would be that such government-imposed fees , taxes , and surcharges would grow to the level we see them in general telecommunications , or that they would be revised to be based on throughput used ( data transfer volumes ) rather than as a flat fee that applies to all users of the service .
So , yes , it is a slippery slope , but not one without merit or one to be dismissed without much dialogue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that initial reactions tend to run along the lines of "There's no way they're going to tax my Internet access!
", but let's give it some thought for a moment.
The Internet has largely become similar to a public utility or similar public accommodation.
[I realize that IANAL and that such terms have specific legal meanings, but allow me to continue to present my case.
] While we may not always like it, most jurisdictions have the authority to collect fees, levees, or taxes to support administrative costs associated with certain public accomodations or utilities: there are fees for curb and gutter, lighting, sewer, water, and road maintenance.
"Wait", you say, "those are all items owned by the municipality.
Municipalities don't own the data cabling or the ISPs (in most cases).
" True, but agents of government do collect taxes, fees, and other surcharges pertaining to telecommunications, certain entertainment venues, and who knows how many other things.
In each of those cases (and yes, I acknowledge that many may argue that government does a poor job of what I will describe), the monies collected are used to provide various municipal or government services.
In some cases, the collected funds may be used for services or things directly related to the surcharge or fee for which the monies were collected (e.g.
curb and gutter improvements), but in other cases the fees are used to support other administrative functions within a municipality (e.g., filing costs, police services, fire services).
If a city sees an uptick in citizen consumption of specific services tied to specific activities (e.g., the number of fire calls relating to backyard fire pits), it only makes sense that the fees associated with the activity (e.g., burning permit, residential fire permit) would increase to help defray any increased costs (e.g., adding members to the fire squad, purchasing additional brush-fire mitigation gear).
If, therefore, law enforcement agencies are finding more and more of their resources are being allocated to crimes or investigations that hinge on Internet usage, is it not reasonable for those agents of government to collect some minimal renumeration to defray their costs (e.g., investigators with the appropriate skils, computer forensic technologies)?
I'm not proposing suggesting that such a path is without danger.
Logically, however, it does seem reasonable.
My biggest concern would be that such government-imposed fees, taxes, and surcharges would grow to the level we see them in general telecommunications, or that they would be revised to be based on throughput used (data transfer volumes) rather than as a flat fee that applies to all users of the service.
So, yes, it is a slippery slope, but not one without merit or one to be dismissed without much dialogue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223681</id>
	<title>Re:"to fight online criminal activity"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244221560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>News flash: a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals.</i></p><p>Umm... I don't think the tax is aimed at making the internet financially unusable to criminals wanting to commit computer crimes.</p><p>It is intended to fund the law enforcing entity that will track down and prosecute those crimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News flash : a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals.Umm... I do n't think the tax is aimed at making the internet financially unusable to criminals wanting to commit computer crimes.It is intended to fund the law enforcing entity that will track down and prosecute those crimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News flash: a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals.Umm... I don't think the tax is aimed at making the internet financially unusable to criminals wanting to commit computer crimes.It is intended to fund the law enforcing entity that will track down and prosecute those crimes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222855</id>
	<title>Re:Did a politician actually say..</title>
	<author>meist3r</author>
	<datestamp>1244218500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd go with the Ankh-Morpork model<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... lets start a Thief's Guild, an Assassins Guild and a Child Molesters Guild<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd go with the Ankh-Morpork model ... lets start a Thief 's Guild , an Assassins Guild and a Child Molesters Guild .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd go with the Ankh-Morpork model ... lets start a Thief's Guild, an Assassins Guild and a Child Molesters Guild ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220823</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28225575</id>
	<title>Heh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244229060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More reason to just borrow your neighbors wifi,eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More reason to just borrow your neighbors wifi,eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More reason to just borrow your neighbors wifi,eh?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221105</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1244210760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I dislike the term "Internet Fraud". Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.</p></div></blockquote><p>

I have to disagree.  From the perspective of law enforcement,  fighting Internet crime requires a lot of extra technical expertise, and that means hiring additional people with extra training.  If anything, internet crime is more like what the FBI and Secret Service have traditionally investigated.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dislike the term " Internet Fraud " .
Fraud is fraud , whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market .
I have to disagree .
From the perspective of law enforcement , fighting Internet crime requires a lot of extra technical expertise , and that means hiring additional people with extra training .
If anything , internet crime is more like what the FBI and Secret Service have traditionally investigated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dislike the term "Internet Fraud".
Fraud is fraud, whether it was conducted on eBay or at the local flea market.
I have to disagree.
From the perspective of law enforcement,  fighting Internet crime requires a lot of extra technical expertise, and that means hiring additional people with extra training.
If anything, internet crime is more like what the FBI and Secret Service have traditionally investigated.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073</id>
	<title>In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244210520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While you are worry about US$ 0.15/mo. We in Brazil need to worry about 40\%, that's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.

I wish I could pay US$ 0.15 in taxes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While you are worry about US $ 0.15/mo .
We in Brazil need to worry about 40 \ % , that 's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service .
I wish I could pay US $ 0.15 in taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you are worry about US$ 0.15/mo.
We in Brazil need to worry about 40\%, that's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.
I wish I could pay US$ 0.15 in taxes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226669</id>
	<title>Re:Bad policy yes, slippery slope... not really.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244234520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, you don't get taxed on ramen noodles. You also don't get taxed on cheeseburgers if you make them yourself, or, in some states, if you take them home instead of eating them at the restaurant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , you do n't get taxed on ramen noodles .
You also do n't get taxed on cheeseburgers if you make them yourself , or , in some states , if you take them home instead of eating them at the restaurant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, you don't get taxed on ramen noodles.
You also don't get taxed on cheeseburgers if you make them yourself, or, in some states, if you take them home instead of eating them at the restaurant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28228847</id>
	<title>No more taxes!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244205240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idiot, moron, democrats are at it again!</p><p>No new taxes!</p><p>No increase in taxes!</p><p>Smaller government!  Less government intervention in our businesses and lives!</p><p>Impeach obama!  Impeach all democrats!  Impeach all liberals and progressives!</p><p>Remove the Czars!  They have no oversight by Congress or any group and thier reach is too broad!</p><p>Repeal all bills passsed into law since b.o. was inagurated!</p><p>Stop printing money!  Return the bail-out and other government spent money to the Treasury!</p><p>Pay down the deficit now!</p><p>Repeal all gay marriage and gay union laws that have passed!</p><p>Remove all illegal immigrints - yes, illegal aliens!</p><p>Punish the "sanctuary cities" that ignore illegal aliens!</p><p>Conservative fiscal management and conservative public administration / government PROVES that the conservative approach is best!</p><p>Bring back and use the death penalties!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idiot , moron , democrats are at it again ! No new taxes ! No increase in taxes ! Smaller government !
Less government intervention in our businesses and lives ! Impeach obama !
Impeach all democrats !
Impeach all liberals and progressives ! Remove the Czars !
They have no oversight by Congress or any group and thier reach is too broad ! Repeal all bills passsed into law since b.o .
was inagurated ! Stop printing money !
Return the bail-out and other government spent money to the Treasury ! Pay down the deficit now ! Repeal all gay marriage and gay union laws that have passed ! Remove all illegal immigrints - yes , illegal aliens ! Punish the " sanctuary cities " that ignore illegal aliens ! Conservative fiscal management and conservative public administration / government PROVES that the conservative approach is best ! Bring back and use the death penalties !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idiot, moron, democrats are at it again!No new taxes!No increase in taxes!Smaller government!
Less government intervention in our businesses and lives!Impeach obama!
Impeach all democrats!
Impeach all liberals and progressives!Remove the Czars!
They have no oversight by Congress or any group and thier reach is too broad!Repeal all bills passsed into law since b.o.
was inagurated!Stop printing money!
Return the bail-out and other government spent money to the Treasury!Pay down the deficit now!Repeal all gay marriage and gay union laws that have passed!Remove all illegal immigrints - yes, illegal aliens!Punish the "sanctuary cities" that ignore illegal aliens!Conservative fiscal management and conservative public administration / government PROVES that the conservative approach is best!Bring back and use the death penalties!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223139</id>
	<title>Re:Bad policy yes, slippery slope... not really.</title>
	<author>Fujisawa Sensei</author>
	<datestamp>1244219580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's just another tax on something that shouldn't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles, water, gasoline, cheeseburgers, cable television, telephones, and almost everything else.</p><p>If you're worried about a slippery slope, please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.</p><p>It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting "online crime".  Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".</p></div><p>If the Libs had there way, there would be. If someone committed a crime against you robbing our house, you would have to pay to keep them incarcerated, not the people.</p><p>And if someone happened to actually kill somebody, they would only go to jail in as long as the victim's family could afford to keep them locked away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just another tax on something that should n't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles , water , gasoline , cheeseburgers , cable television , telephones , and almost everything else.If you 're worried about a slippery slope , please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting " online crime " .
Why do n't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the " shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax " .If the Libs had there way , there would be .
If someone committed a crime against you robbing our house , you would have to pay to keep them incarcerated , not the people.And if someone happened to actually kill somebody , they would only go to jail in as long as the victim 's family could afford to keep them locked away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just another tax on something that shouldn't be taxed... We already get taxed on ramen noodles, water, gasoline, cheeseburgers, cable television, telephones, and almost everything else.If you're worried about a slippery slope, please glance downward at the icy incline and the skates on your feet.It is kinda stupid to justify as way to pay for fighting "online crime".
Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".If the Libs had there way, there would be.
If someone committed a crime against you robbing our house, you would have to pay to keep them incarcerated, not the people.And if someone happened to actually kill somebody, they would only go to jail in as long as the victim's family could afford to keep them locked away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</id>
	<title>Awesome!  Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244207940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Rep. Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs, said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell's office that investigates Internet crimes, <b>particularly online sex crimes against children</b>.</p> </div><p>I agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order, you'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children.  Like <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/majcases/fraud/internetschemes.htm" title="fbi.gov" rel="nofollow">Internet Fraud</a> [fbi.gov] and <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud/websites/idtheft.html" title="usdoj.gov" rel="nofollow">Identity Theft</a> [usdoj.gov].  How much money do people lose to things like that?  Hint: A lot.<br> <br>

I'm sick and tired of thinking of the children, let's think about everybody for a while.  The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes and they're the motivation behind 50\% of the legislation in this country.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rep. Mack " Bodi " White , R-Denham Springs , said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell , to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell 's office that investigates Internet crimes , particularly online sex crimes against children .
I agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order , you 'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children .
Like Internet Fraud [ fbi.gov ] and Identity Theft [ usdoj.gov ] .
How much money do people lose to things like that ?
Hint : A lot .
I 'm sick and tired of thinking of the children , let 's think about everybody for a while .
The lil ' bastards do n't even pay taxes and they 're the motivation behind 50 \ % of the legislation in this country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rep. Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs, said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell's office that investigates Internet crimes, particularly online sex crimes against children.
I agree that sex crime against children are very very bad but I think that if you look at the scope and size of the problems that plague the internet and ranked them in order, you'd find many other things precede sex crimes against children.
Like Internet Fraud [fbi.gov] and Identity Theft [usdoj.gov].
How much money do people lose to things like that?
Hint: A lot.
I'm sick and tired of thinking of the children, let's think about everybody for a while.
The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes and they're the motivation behind 50\% of the legislation in this country.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221807</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1244214000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Do they similarly tax photographs? How about telephone service? "</i> <p>
Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service. At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do they similarly tax photographs ?
How about telephone service ?
" Actually yes...at least on the phone thing , most everywhere taxes phone service .
At least , according to any bill I 've ever had for a phone , landline or cell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do they similarly tax photographs?
How about telephone service?
" 
Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service.
At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229997</id>
	<title>Re:They shoud make it a dollar</title>
	<author>ajlisows</author>
	<datestamp>1244221380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have any proof to backup your claim that the more you educate a society the fewer the crimes that occur?  I am not so sure of this.  Perhaps the types of crime or the methods used might change, but surely crime will be ever present.</p><p>Sexual Assault of children is a crime that will be performed by a completely poor idiot or an absolutely brilliant millionaire.  Theft?  You assume that only poor, dumb people want to take your money/stuff.  Surely there are smart, rich people who are of the same mindset.  Murder?  Not exclusive to poor black men in Compton.  Drugs?  The Number of intelligent and educated people I have seen hooked on drugs is staggering.</p><p>In fact, ensuring everyone is highly educated could lead to more dangerous criminals. Surely many of those who are engaged in internet fraud have a decent degree of technical "Education" of some type.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have any proof to backup your claim that the more you educate a society the fewer the crimes that occur ?
I am not so sure of this .
Perhaps the types of crime or the methods used might change , but surely crime will be ever present.Sexual Assault of children is a crime that will be performed by a completely poor idiot or an absolutely brilliant millionaire .
Theft ? You assume that only poor , dumb people want to take your money/stuff .
Surely there are smart , rich people who are of the same mindset .
Murder ? Not exclusive to poor black men in Compton .
Drugs ? The Number of intelligent and educated people I have seen hooked on drugs is staggering.In fact , ensuring everyone is highly educated could lead to more dangerous criminals .
Surely many of those who are engaged in internet fraud have a decent degree of technical " Education " of some type .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have any proof to backup your claim that the more you educate a society the fewer the crimes that occur?
I am not so sure of this.
Perhaps the types of crime or the methods used might change, but surely crime will be ever present.Sexual Assault of children is a crime that will be performed by a completely poor idiot or an absolutely brilliant millionaire.
Theft?  You assume that only poor, dumb people want to take your money/stuff.
Surely there are smart, rich people who are of the same mindset.
Murder?  Not exclusive to poor black men in Compton.
Drugs?  The Number of intelligent and educated people I have seen hooked on drugs is staggering.In fact, ensuring everyone is highly educated could lead to more dangerous criminals.
Surely many of those who are engaged in internet fraud have a decent degree of technical "Education" of some type.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221437</id>
	<title>Yeah, right</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1244212380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Who cares?  There's so many additional fees on my phone bill that I wouldn't notice a fifteen-cent DSL tax.  It's a lot less than the other little governmental add-ons.
</p><p>
Of course, what I'd like to see done with it is to help expand broadband access.  The problem with a state tax to address internet ills is that the internet is so much bigger than any state, or even any country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ?
There 's so many additional fees on my phone bill that I would n't notice a fifteen-cent DSL tax .
It 's a lot less than the other little governmental add-ons .
Of course , what I 'd like to see done with it is to help expand broadband access .
The problem with a state tax to address internet ills is that the internet is so much bigger than any state , or even any country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Who cares?
There's so many additional fees on my phone bill that I wouldn't notice a fifteen-cent DSL tax.
It's a lot less than the other little governmental add-ons.
Of course, what I'd like to see done with it is to help expand broadband access.
The problem with a state tax to address internet ills is that the internet is so much bigger than any state, or even any country.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733</id>
	<title>I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This surcharge is $1.70 per year. That's not that much.</p><p>I've been to Louisiana. They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated, violent, and poor urban populace is any indication. Also, <a href="http://www.drivinglouisianaforward.org/index.cfm?md=newsroom&amp;tmp=detail&amp;articleID=29&amp;catID=2" title="drivinglou...orward.org" rel="nofollow">their roads are pretty bad</a> [drivinglou...orward.org], so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This surcharge is $ 1.70 per year .
That 's not that much.I 've been to Louisiana .
They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated , violent , and poor urban populace is any indication .
Also , their roads are pretty bad [ drivinglou...orward.org ] , so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This surcharge is $1.70 per year.
That's not that much.I've been to Louisiana.
They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated, violent, and poor urban populace is any indication.
Also, their roads are pretty bad [drivinglou...orward.org], so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220923</id>
	<title>Dedicated revenue streams are gimmicks</title>
	<author>netbuzz</author>
	<datestamp>1244209620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course it's tough to vote against "protecting the children," but if this expenditure is necessary it should take a place in line with every other legitimate need and wait for its share of the income tax. Special interests are going to be lined up around the block to try this one in La.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it 's tough to vote against " protecting the children , " but if this expenditure is necessary it should take a place in line with every other legitimate need and wait for its share of the income tax .
Special interests are going to be lined up around the block to try this one in La .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it's tough to vote against "protecting the children," but if this expenditure is necessary it should take a place in line with every other legitimate need and wait for its share of the income tax.
Special interests are going to be lined up around the block to try this one in La.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221669</id>
	<title>Re:In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>Ogive17</author>
	<datestamp>1244213460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is an additional tax, not the total tax.  I don't live in Louisiana but in my town in Ohio I have one choice for broadband, Time Warner Cable, and that costs $45 + another $5 or $6 in taxes that are tacked on (which is about 97-100 Reals).  I'm suppose to get a 7Mbit connection but it's normally only around 4Mbit.  Not to mention if I stream video it seems to magically slow way down.<br>
<br>
How much do you pay for broadband a month?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an additional tax , not the total tax .
I do n't live in Louisiana but in my town in Ohio I have one choice for broadband , Time Warner Cable , and that costs $ 45 + another $ 5 or $ 6 in taxes that are tacked on ( which is about 97-100 Reals ) .
I 'm suppose to get a 7Mbit connection but it 's normally only around 4Mbit .
Not to mention if I stream video it seems to magically slow way down .
How much do you pay for broadband a month ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an additional tax, not the total tax.
I don't live in Louisiana but in my town in Ohio I have one choice for broadband, Time Warner Cable, and that costs $45 + another $5 or $6 in taxes that are tacked on (which is about 97-100 Reals).
I'm suppose to get a 7Mbit connection but it's normally only around 4Mbit.
Not to mention if I stream video it seems to magically slow way down.
How much do you pay for broadband a month?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220859</id>
	<title>Tax child porn!</title>
	<author>Engeekneer</author>
	<datestamp>1244209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think those who commit the crime should pay. If you'd tax the child porn, you'd even get a nice feedback loop. When your anti-childporn measures (uhm..  discount coupons to stores that sell childrens clothes?) are working well enough, your funds get cut, If it picks up again, boom! Automatic funding!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think those who commit the crime should pay .
If you 'd tax the child porn , you 'd even get a nice feedback loop .
When your anti-childporn measures ( uhm.. discount coupons to stores that sell childrens clothes ?
) are working well enough , your funds get cut , If it picks up again , boom !
Automatic funding !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think those who commit the crime should pay.
If you'd tax the child porn, you'd even get a nice feedback loop.
When your anti-childporn measures (uhm..  discount coupons to stores that sell childrens clothes?
) are working well enough, your funds get cut, If it picks up again, boom!
Automatic funding!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221323</id>
	<title>Re:Bad policy yes, slippery slope... not really.</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1244211900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".</p></div></blockquote><p>They probably already do. Why do you think cities have their own taxes to pay for local law enforcement and other services. The internet has escaped local taxes other than sales tax, so where should the extra money to provide online law enforcement come from ? By charging everybody, including people who don't use the internet, or just those who do ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the " shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax " .They probably already do .
Why do you think cities have their own taxes to pay for local law enforcement and other services .
The internet has escaped local taxes other than sales tax , so where should the extra money to provide online law enforcement come from ?
By charging everybody , including people who do n't use the internet , or just those who do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't they levy an additional tax on retail sales and call it the "shoplifter arrest and incarceration tax".They probably already do.
Why do you think cities have their own taxes to pay for local law enforcement and other services.
The internet has escaped local taxes other than sales tax, so where should the extra money to provide online law enforcement come from ?
By charging everybody, including people who don't use the internet, or just those who do ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849</id>
	<title>Okay, and....?</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1244209140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at all the surcharges you pay on your telephone bill.  I think the federal rural phone tax lasted until something like 1999?</p><p>This is a non-story.  The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase.  It's coming.</p><p>(and maybe a federal one, too)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at all the surcharges you pay on your telephone bill .
I think the federal rural phone tax lasted until something like 1999 ? This is a non-story .
The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase .
It 's coming .
( and maybe a federal one , too )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at all the surcharges you pay on your telephone bill.
I think the federal rural phone tax lasted until something like 1999?This is a non-story.
The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase.
It's coming.
(and maybe a federal one, too)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222343</id>
	<title>Waste of time</title>
	<author>tarlss</author>
	<datestamp>1244216520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about a waste of time tax where legislators have to pay 1\% of their income for every piece of legislation that they propose that get shot down or struck down in court?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a waste of time tax where legislators have to pay 1 \ % of their income for every piece of legislation that they propose that get shot down or struck down in court ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a waste of time tax where legislators have to pay 1\% of their income for every piece of legislation that they propose that get shot down or struck down in court?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223523</id>
	<title>"slippery slope" misused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244220960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Slippery slope" is a technical term that picks out a particular logical fallacy.  As is the case here, people seem to think naming this kind of argument lends it credibility.  I'm not sure how this came to be, after all, the name picks out an argument that has been identified as faulty.  And it is certainly the case that Timothy's implied conclusion is fallacious in this way: there is no reason to suppose that because a 15-cent tax on internet usage is now being imposed that more taxation is to follow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Slippery slope " is a technical term that picks out a particular logical fallacy .
As is the case here , people seem to think naming this kind of argument lends it credibility .
I 'm not sure how this came to be , after all , the name picks out an argument that has been identified as faulty .
And it is certainly the case that Timothy 's implied conclusion is fallacious in this way : there is no reason to suppose that because a 15-cent tax on internet usage is now being imposed that more taxation is to follow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Slippery slope" is a technical term that picks out a particular logical fallacy.
As is the case here, people seem to think naming this kind of argument lends it credibility.
I'm not sure how this came to be, after all, the name picks out an argument that has been identified as faulty.
And it is certainly the case that Timothy's implied conclusion is fallacious in this way: there is no reason to suppose that because a 15-cent tax on internet usage is now being imposed that more taxation is to follow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1244210760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do they similarly tax photographs?  How about telephone service?  I imagine both are used for sex crimes against children.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they similarly tax photographs ?
How about telephone service ?
I imagine both are used for sex crimes against children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they similarly tax photographs?
How about telephone service?
I imagine both are used for sex crimes against children.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381</id>
	<title>They shoud make it a dollar</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244220360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and have it go into education.<br>The more you educate a society, the fewer crimes that occur. Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and have it go into education.The more you educate a society , the fewer crimes that occur .
Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and have it go into education.The more you educate a society, the fewer crimes that occur.
Also has the nice benefit of having an area with more businesses and a larger talent pool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28228211</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>ConceptJunkie</author>
	<datestamp>1244200680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's the matter?  You don't think feelings and empathy are a good basis for law?  What do you expect to base law on?  Fact?  Reason?  Those are archaic ideas that have passed out of favor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's the matter ?
You do n't think feelings and empathy are a good basis for law ?
What do you expect to base law on ?
Fact ? Reason ?
Those are archaic ideas that have passed out of favor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's the matter?
You don't think feelings and empathy are a good basis for law?
What do you expect to base law on?
Fact?  Reason?
Those are archaic ideas that have passed out of favor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223323</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>kheldan</author>
	<datestamp>1244220180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually you're not cynical enough. Children are not the <b>motivation</b>, they're the <b>excuse</b>. Think of it as a soft terror-tactic: <i>pay us $0.15 per month, or little Timmy will become the victim of online predators! EVERYBODY PANIC!</i> It's basic social engineering: If you can panic people, make them give in to fear, their higher brain functions turn off; then you've GOT them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually you 're not cynical enough .
Children are not the motivation , they 're the excuse .
Think of it as a soft terror-tactic : pay us $ 0.15 per month , or little Timmy will become the victim of online predators !
EVERYBODY PANIC !
It 's basic social engineering : If you can panic people , make them give in to fear , their higher brain functions turn off ; then you 've GOT them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually you're not cynical enough.
Children are not the motivation, they're the excuse.
Think of it as a soft terror-tactic: pay us $0.15 per month, or little Timmy will become the victim of online predators!
EVERYBODY PANIC!
It's basic social engineering: If you can panic people, make them give in to fear, their higher brain functions turn off; then you've GOT them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223395</id>
	<title>Re:Reminds me of....</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244220420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A fine example of a good government. Someone proposed something stupid, the public shot it down.<br>Well done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A fine example of a good government .
Someone proposed something stupid , the public shot it down.Well done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A fine example of a good government.
Someone proposed something stupid, the public shot it down.Well done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801</id>
	<title>"to fight online criminal activity"</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1244208780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>News flash: a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>News flash : a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News flash: a 15-cents-a-month tax will not deter criminals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221815</id>
	<title>Re:In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>jcrousedotcom</author>
	<datestamp>1244214060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This article is about the 15 but in reality, many Americans are closer to 20\%+ in taxes on telecommunications <a href="http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/503.html" title="taxfoundation.org" rel="nofollow">services with some being over 30\%.</a> [taxfoundation.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is about the 15 but in reality , many Americans are closer to 20 \ % + in taxes on telecommunications services with some being over 30 \ % .
[ taxfoundation.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is about the 15 but in reality, many Americans are closer to 20\%+ in taxes on telecommunications services with some being over 30\%.
[taxfoundation.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226061</id>
	<title>republicans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244231400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story is tagged "democrats". But the story says:</p><blockquote><div><p>Rep. Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs, said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell's office that investigates Internet crimes, particularly online sex crimes against children.</p></div> </blockquote><p>That "R-" means the sponsor is a <b>Republican</b>, for a <b>Republican</b> Attorney General. All over the story it's got Democrats opposing it on an anti-tax basis. As for Jindal, a Republican who therefore wants to be a cop without paying for it:</p><blockquote><div><p> The bill presented a conflict for Gov. Jindal, who has repeatedly pushed for tougher penalties against sex offenders but also has opposed any proposal that could be considered a tax increase.</p><p>"While we absolutely support cracking down on sex offenders that prey on our children, we're opposed to raising taxes on the people of Louisiana," Jindal press secretary Kyle Plotkin said in a statement Thursday.</p></div> </blockquote><p>This story might say something about Republicans. It doesn't at all say anything about "Democrats". Except that there's nothing a Republican tagger won't try to blame on Democrats, even when it's Republicans doing it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This story is tagged " democrats " .
But the story says : Rep. Mack " Bodi " White , R-Denham Springs , said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell , to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell 's office that investigates Internet crimes , particularly online sex crimes against children .
That " R- " means the sponsor is a Republican , for a Republican Attorney General .
All over the story it 's got Democrats opposing it on an anti-tax basis .
As for Jindal , a Republican who therefore wants to be a cop without paying for it : The bill presented a conflict for Gov .
Jindal , who has repeatedly pushed for tougher penalties against sex offenders but also has opposed any proposal that could be considered a tax increase .
" While we absolutely support cracking down on sex offenders that prey on our children , we 're opposed to raising taxes on the people of Louisiana , " Jindal press secretary Kyle Plotkin said in a statement Thursday .
This story might say something about Republicans .
It does n't at all say anything about " Democrats " .
Except that there 's nothing a Republican tagger wo n't try to blame on Democrats , even when it 's Republicans doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story is tagged "democrats".
But the story says:Rep. Mack "Bodi" White, R-Denham Springs, said he sponsored the bill for Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, to raise money to finance a division in Caldwell's office that investigates Internet crimes, particularly online sex crimes against children.
That "R-" means the sponsor is a Republican, for a Republican Attorney General.
All over the story it's got Democrats opposing it on an anti-tax basis.
As for Jindal, a Republican who therefore wants to be a cop without paying for it: The bill presented a conflict for Gov.
Jindal, who has repeatedly pushed for tougher penalties against sex offenders but also has opposed any proposal that could be considered a tax increase.
"While we absolutely support cracking down on sex offenders that prey on our children, we're opposed to raising taxes on the people of Louisiana," Jindal press secretary Kyle Plotkin said in a statement Thursday.
This story might say something about Republicans.
It doesn't at all say anything about "Democrats".
Except that there's nothing a Republican tagger won't try to blame on Democrats, even when it's Republicans doing it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220955</id>
	<title>No Katrina money left?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What about the billions we already gave to that incompetent Nagan and his crooked police force?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the billions we already gave to that incompetent Nagan and his crooked police force ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the billions we already gave to that incompetent Nagan and his crooked police force?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221505</id>
	<title>Damn them</title>
	<author>Workaphobia</author>
	<datestamp>1244212680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn Louisiana for making me side with Jindal! Damn them all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn Louisiana for making me side with Jindal !
Damn them all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn Louisiana for making me side with Jindal!
Damn them all!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222633</id>
	<title>Re:Okay, and....?</title>
	<author>ubercam</author>
	<datestamp>1244217600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase.</p></div><p>Uhm up here in Soviet Canuckistan we have GST (Goods &amp; Services Tax - Federal) at 5\% and PST (Provincial Sales Tax) anywhere from 0\% in Alberta (thank the black gold) to 10\% in PEI where they even tax the GST (Quebec taxes tax too).</p><p>Here in Manitoba (PST = 7\%) there are very few untaxed things. Food at the store tends to be untaxed, like milk, eggs, flour, sugar, bread etc. If it's junk food or processed stuff I think you have to pay. I'm not 100\% on the rules for that and they probably vary by province anyway.</p><p>Also pretty much every European country has some form of Value Added Tax (VAT, MWST, etc) that's leveraged on every purchase, and some are scary high too. When I was living in Germany a couple years ago they raised it to 19\%. In much of Scandinavia the rate is 25\%! They, however, post prices with the tax already in.. something I really like and wish we did here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase.Uhm up here in Soviet Canuckistan we have GST ( Goods &amp; Services Tax - Federal ) at 5 \ % and PST ( Provincial Sales Tax ) anywhere from 0 \ % in Alberta ( thank the black gold ) to 10 \ % in PEI where they even tax the GST ( Quebec taxes tax too ) .Here in Manitoba ( PST = 7 \ % ) there are very few untaxed things .
Food at the store tends to be untaxed , like milk , eggs , flour , sugar , bread etc .
If it 's junk food or processed stuff I think you have to pay .
I 'm not 100 \ % on the rules for that and they probably vary by province anyway.Also pretty much every European country has some form of Value Added Tax ( VAT , MWST , etc ) that 's leveraged on every purchase , and some are scary high too .
When I was living in Germany a couple years ago they raised it to 19 \ % .
In much of Scandinavia the rate is 25 \ % !
They , however , post prices with the tax already in.. something I really like and wish we did here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The big story where states are going to soak people for taxes is when Congress allows them to do sales tax on every single purchase.Uhm up here in Soviet Canuckistan we have GST (Goods &amp; Services Tax - Federal) at 5\% and PST (Provincial Sales Tax) anywhere from 0\% in Alberta (thank the black gold) to 10\% in PEI where they even tax the GST (Quebec taxes tax too).Here in Manitoba (PST = 7\%) there are very few untaxed things.
Food at the store tends to be untaxed, like milk, eggs, flour, sugar, bread etc.
If it's junk food or processed stuff I think you have to pay.
I'm not 100\% on the rules for that and they probably vary by province anyway.Also pretty much every European country has some form of Value Added Tax (VAT, MWST, etc) that's leveraged on every purchase, and some are scary high too.
When I was living in Germany a couple years ago they raised it to 19\%.
In much of Scandinavia the rate is 25\%!
They, however, post prices with the tax already in.. something I really like and wish we did here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221865</id>
	<title>Deficit spending</title>
	<author>doug141</author>
	<datestamp>1244214300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes"</p><p>Deficit spending means we will bill today's children tomorrow, for things we enjoy today but won't pay for ourselves. Each of those "non-payers" owes about $30,000 the day they are born.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The lil ' bastards do n't even pay taxes " Deficit spending means we will bill today 's children tomorrow , for things we enjoy today but wo n't pay for ourselves .
Each of those " non-payers " owes about $ 30,000 the day they are born .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes"Deficit spending means we will bill today's children tomorrow, for things we enjoy today but won't pay for ourselves.
Each of those "non-payers" owes about $30,000 the day they are born.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221139</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244210940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So you're saying that your anti-children?</p></div><p>His anti-children what?<br> <br>
On a similar note, I accidentally a bottle of coke.  Is that bad?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying that your anti-children ? His anti-children what ?
On a similar note , I accidentally a bottle of coke .
Is that bad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying that your anti-children?His anti-children what?
On a similar note, I accidentally a bottle of coke.
Is that bad?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222469</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244216940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which would you rather see happen:<br>A few people don't loose some money, or on less child gets raped?</p><p>The priority of which crimes to go after is not, nor should it be, based on the number of times it happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which would you rather see happen : A few people do n't loose some money , or on less child gets raped ? The priority of which crimes to go after is not , nor should it be , based on the number of times it happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which would you rather see happen:A few people don't loose some money, or on less child gets raped?The priority of which crimes to go after is not, nor should it be, based on the number of times it happens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221519</id>
	<title>Re:In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Soviet Russia internet pays you! In Brazil internet is a luxury and not a utility. We are already forcing the poor off of the internet and creating wider gaps. This will make it even harder for them, because it only goes up from here. If we don't fight it now it will go up even further. Know what happens when you tax the internet 40\%? When the internet crashes, so do airplanes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia internet pays you !
In Brazil internet is a luxury and not a utility .
We are already forcing the poor off of the internet and creating wider gaps .
This will make it even harder for them , because it only goes up from here .
If we do n't fight it now it will go up even further .
Know what happens when you tax the internet 40 \ % ?
When the internet crashes , so do airplanes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia internet pays you!
In Brazil internet is a luxury and not a utility.
We are already forcing the poor off of the internet and creating wider gaps.
This will make it even harder for them, because it only goes up from here.
If we don't fight it now it will go up even further.
Know what happens when you tax the internet 40\%?
When the internet crashes, so do airplanes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221197</id>
	<title>Internet 2.0?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244211120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the internet is just a large network, can't we just form another one? If enough people are involved then it'll be a usefull tool... which means it'll be connected to the internet by somebody.. which means you'll have subverted the tax and decentralized it back to how it should be. Bonus points for ending up with free internet access.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the internet is just a large network , ca n't we just form another one ?
If enough people are involved then it 'll be a usefull tool... which means it 'll be connected to the internet by somebody.. which means you 'll have subverted the tax and decentralized it back to how it should be .
Bonus points for ending up with free internet access .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the internet is just a large network, can't we just form another one?
If enough people are involved then it'll be a usefull tool... which means it'll be connected to the internet by somebody.. which means you'll have subverted the tax and decentralized it back to how it should be.
Bonus points for ending up with free internet access.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220945</id>
	<title>What if you want to offer free Wi-Fi?</title>
	<author>Schraegstrichpunkt</author>
	<datestamp>1244209740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does this affect people who want to offer free Wi-Fi?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does this affect people who want to offer free Wi-Fi ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does this affect people who want to offer free Wi-Fi?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220769</id>
	<title>Make 'em pay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't live in Louisiana (or the US), but I'd be quite cross if they started charging me because other people like to watch images of naked kids.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't live in Louisiana ( or the US ) , but I 'd be quite cross if they started charging me because other people like to watch images of naked kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't live in Louisiana (or the US), but I'd be quite cross if they started charging me because other people like to watch images of naked kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222735</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244218020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The education budget gets a few extra million from the ISPs each year. Mysteriously at the same time, their contribution from the general state budget decreases by the exact same amount...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The education budget gets a few extra million from the ISPs each year .
Mysteriously at the same time , their contribution from the general state budget decreases by the exact same amount.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The education budget gets a few extra million from the ISPs each year.
Mysteriously at the same time, their contribution from the general state budget decreases by the exact same amount...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221667</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Ferretman</author>
	<datestamp>1244213460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Between this and the Congressional idea of a VAT tax, don't folks "get it" that it's never enough with these guys?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Between this and the Congressional idea of a VAT tax , do n't folks " get it " that it 's never enough with these guys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Between this and the Congressional idea of a VAT tax, don't folks "get it" that it's never enough with these guys?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229261</id>
	<title>Re:In Brazil we pay 40\%</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1244210580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those aren't taxes.  They make their business costs <em>look</em> like taxes to avoid making them part of the price.  Go ahead and ask a representative some time what those extra things are.</p><p>For instance, 911 and e911 are not services run by the governement.  They are run by the phone companies.  The government requires them to run them, it's true, but the government doesn't tell them how much they're supposed to cost, or take money from the system.  It's simply a normal cost of regulatory compliance, and as such really ought to be folded into the price.</p><p>If you've got some balls, see if you can get away with telling them that the advertised price (plus legitimate sales tax) is all you're going to pay....</p><p>And yes, I'm saddend that I used the phrase "get away with" to refer to your actions, and not the phone companies actions, as they're clearly able to get away with billing you more than the agreed upon monthly fee.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those are n't taxes .
They make their business costs look like taxes to avoid making them part of the price .
Go ahead and ask a representative some time what those extra things are.For instance , 911 and e911 are not services run by the governement .
They are run by the phone companies .
The government requires them to run them , it 's true , but the government does n't tell them how much they 're supposed to cost , or take money from the system .
It 's simply a normal cost of regulatory compliance , and as such really ought to be folded into the price.If you 've got some balls , see if you can get away with telling them that the advertised price ( plus legitimate sales tax ) is all you 're going to pay....And yes , I 'm saddend that I used the phrase " get away with " to refer to your actions , and not the phone companies actions , as they 're clearly able to get away with billing you more than the agreed upon monthly fee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those aren't taxes.
They make their business costs look like taxes to avoid making them part of the price.
Go ahead and ask a representative some time what those extra things are.For instance, 911 and e911 are not services run by the governement.
They are run by the phone companies.
The government requires them to run them, it's true, but the government doesn't tell them how much they're supposed to cost, or take money from the system.
It's simply a normal cost of regulatory compliance, and as such really ought to be folded into the price.If you've got some balls, see if you can get away with telling them that the advertised price (plus legitimate sales tax) is all you're going to pay....And yes, I'm saddend that I used the phrase "get away with" to refer to your actions, and not the phone companies actions, as they're clearly able to get away with billing you more than the agreed upon monthly fee.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221669</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221111</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244210820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated, violent, and poor urban populace is any indication. Also, <a href="http://www.drivinglouisianaforward.org/index.cfm?md=newsroom&amp;tmp=detail&amp;articleID=29&amp;catID=2" title="drivinglou...orward.org" rel="nofollow">their roads are pretty bad</a> [drivinglou...orward.org], so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.</p></div><p>BadAnalogyGuy, please don't dilute yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education. Or more than anything for show. I am now convinced that they want to keep the people ignorant. The polls can be led by things like welfare. How do you think that Edwin "Fast Eddie" Edwards was re-elected after his first term when out of office he said I am a crook but you will never catch me? Two more terms for welfare; that is how. Then he sold the casino licenses that should have been properly bid for. Don't get me started on that. Tourism isn't everything. The money from the taxes on the casino's was supposed to get teacher pay to the regional average (from Louisiana to Georgia, where I am presently), but teachers had to picket in my hometown of Shreveport, just to get them to raise it to the state average. I always said if I made it out, I wouldn't return. I was able to leave five years ago.</p><p>
&nbsp; </p><p>The roads are bad they say because we wouldn't set the minimum drinking age to 21 for several years and were the last state to holdout. The government withheld federal funds for the rebuilding of roads until the laws were changed. So yea, the roads suck ass and you can tell you have left the state with your eyes closed at any border.</p><p> But enough about Louisiana, until the people decide to run the politicians out of town like the olds days, change will not come. But I think we live in a  police state, until I see something like that happen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated , violent , and poor urban populace is any indication .
Also , their roads are pretty bad [ drivinglou...orward.org ] , so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.BadAnalogyGuy , please do n't dilute yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education .
Or more than anything for show .
I am now convinced that they want to keep the people ignorant .
The polls can be led by things like welfare .
How do you think that Edwin " Fast Eddie " Edwards was re-elected after his first term when out of office he said I am a crook but you will never catch me ?
Two more terms for welfare ; that is how .
Then he sold the casino licenses that should have been properly bid for .
Do n't get me started on that .
Tourism is n't everything .
The money from the taxes on the casino 's was supposed to get teacher pay to the regional average ( from Louisiana to Georgia , where I am presently ) , but teachers had to picket in my hometown of Shreveport , just to get them to raise it to the state average .
I always said if I made it out , I would n't return .
I was able to leave five years ago .
  The roads are bad they say because we would n't set the minimum drinking age to 21 for several years and were the last state to holdout .
The government withheld federal funds for the rebuilding of roads until the laws were changed .
So yea , the roads suck ass and you can tell you have left the state with your eyes closed at any border .
But enough about Louisiana , until the people decide to run the politicians out of town like the olds days , change will not come .
But I think we live in a police state , until I see something like that happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... They could definitely use a little extra cash in their coffers for education if their uneducated, violent, and poor urban populace is any indication.
Also, their roads are pretty bad [drivinglou...orward.org], so extra money coming in could allow extra funds to go towards improving that.BadAnalogyGuy, please don't dilute yourself or others if you think Louisiana is going to put any money toward education.
Or more than anything for show.
I am now convinced that they want to keep the people ignorant.
The polls can be led by things like welfare.
How do you think that Edwin "Fast Eddie" Edwards was re-elected after his first term when out of office he said I am a crook but you will never catch me?
Two more terms for welfare; that is how.
Then he sold the casino licenses that should have been properly bid for.
Don't get me started on that.
Tourism isn't everything.
The money from the taxes on the casino's was supposed to get teacher pay to the regional average (from Louisiana to Georgia, where I am presently), but teachers had to picket in my hometown of Shreveport, just to get them to raise it to the state average.
I always said if I made it out, I wouldn't return.
I was able to leave five years ago.
  The roads are bad they say because we wouldn't set the minimum drinking age to 21 for several years and were the last state to holdout.
The government withheld federal funds for the rebuilding of roads until the laws were changed.
So yea, the roads suck ass and you can tell you have left the state with your eyes closed at any border.
But enough about Louisiana, until the people decide to run the politicians out of town like the olds days, change will not come.
But I think we live in a  police state, until I see something like that happen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220823</id>
	<title>Did a politician actually say..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244208960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA - "I don't think we should start instituting a revenue stream for every criminal element that's out there,"

Maybe the Mayans were right about 2012.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA - " I do n't think we should start instituting a revenue stream for every criminal element that 's out there , " Maybe the Mayans were right about 2012 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA - "I don't think we should start instituting a revenue stream for every criminal element that's out there,"

Maybe the Mayans were right about 2012.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221059</id>
	<title>This is a great idea</title>
	<author>glebovitz</author>
	<datestamp>1244210460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>after all, Louisiana has no other major pressing issues that might require some financial attention, such as finding homes for all the people displaced by Katrina. Before they spend the money on protecting children from the evil Internet, maybe they should spend some effort on protecting children from the evil collapsing infrastructure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>after all , Louisiana has no other major pressing issues that might require some financial attention , such as finding homes for all the people displaced by Katrina .
Before they spend the money on protecting children from the evil Internet , maybe they should spend some effort on protecting children from the evil collapsing infrastructure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>after all, Louisiana has no other major pressing issues that might require some financial attention, such as finding homes for all the people displaced by Katrina.
Before they spend the money on protecting children from the evil Internet, maybe they should spend some effort on protecting children from the evil collapsing infrastructure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221553</id>
	<title>Re:HAHAHA!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red!</p></div><p>First, it is spelled "Corporation". Second, I have a feeling you mean Republicans. In which case, I point out to you, the Governor who is threatening to veto the internet tax is also a Republican or a "Coroprationist(sic) Red" as you so put it.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Disclaimer: I'm not American.</p></div><p>1. I can tell. 2. We're very thankful you're not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red ! First , it is spelled " Corporation " .
Second , I have a feeling you mean Republicans .
In which case , I point out to you , the Governor who is threatening to veto the internet tax is also a Republican or a " Coroprationist ( sic ) Red " as you so put it.Disclaimer : I 'm not American.1 .
I can tell .
2. We 're very thankful you 're not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Serves you right for voting Coroprationist Red!First, it is spelled "Corporation".
Second, I have a feeling you mean Republicans.
In which case, I point out to you, the Governor who is threatening to veto the internet tax is also a Republican or a "Coroprationist(sic) Red" as you so put it.Disclaimer: I'm not American.1.
I can tell.
2. We're very thankful you're not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222539</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1244217240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"...particularly online sex crimes against children."</i>
<br> <br>
and FTA:  <i>""I don't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children's protection," said Rep. Simone Champagne, D-Jeanerette. "</i>
<br> <br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For\_The\_Children\_(politics)" title="wikipedia.org">Think of the children!</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...particularly online sex crimes against children .
" and FTA : " " I do n't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children 's protection , " said Rep. Simone Champagne , D-Jeanerette .
" Think of the children !
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...particularly online sex crimes against children.
"
 
and FTA:  ""I don't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children's protection," said Rep. Simone Champagne, D-Jeanerette.
"
 
Think of the children!
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220879</id>
	<title>Full disclosure for me too...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244209320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary: "Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s."<br>OK, well...before I post, I should disclose some things too.<br>I've said the word "Louisiana" 11,547 times in my life.  I've never been there, but I hear they have some weird tax on the Intertubes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : " Full disclosure : I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s .
" OK , well...before I post , I should disclose some things too.I 've said the word " Louisiana " 11,547 times in my life .
I 've never been there , but I hear they have some weird tax on the Intertubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary: "Full disclosure: I grew up in south Louisiana and worked for WWL-TV in the late '70s.
"OK, well...before I post, I should disclose some things too.I've said the word "Louisiana" 11,547 times in my life.
I've never been there, but I hear they have some weird tax on the Intertubes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221447</id>
	<title>I support this idea.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244212440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There should also be a 15 cent tax on cellphones to fight crimes organised via cellphones, also a 15 cent tax on roads to fight vehicular crime, and a 15 cent tax on water for illegal cult kool-aid manufacture. Not to mention a 15 cent tax on sunlight which is used in the illicit manufacture of marijuana.</p><p>Does Louisiana currently tax the sale of firearms and ammunition for the specific purpose of paying for anti-gun violence enforcement?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There should also be a 15 cent tax on cellphones to fight crimes organised via cellphones , also a 15 cent tax on roads to fight vehicular crime , and a 15 cent tax on water for illegal cult kool-aid manufacture .
Not to mention a 15 cent tax on sunlight which is used in the illicit manufacture of marijuana.Does Louisiana currently tax the sale of firearms and ammunition for the specific purpose of paying for anti-gun violence enforcement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should also be a 15 cent tax on cellphones to fight crimes organised via cellphones, also a 15 cent tax on roads to fight vehicular crime, and a 15 cent tax on water for illegal cult kool-aid manufacture.
Not to mention a 15 cent tax on sunlight which is used in the illicit manufacture of marijuana.Does Louisiana currently tax the sale of firearms and ammunition for the specific purpose of paying for anti-gun violence enforcement?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224903</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244226120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are an asshole. kids are the future of our world. Children cant pay taxes. I know you dont have kids saying something like that. WHAT A DICK YOU ARE!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are an asshole .
kids are the future of our world .
Children cant pay taxes .
I know you dont have kids saying something like that .
WHAT A DICK YOU ARE ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are an asshole.
kids are the future of our world.
Children cant pay taxes.
I know you dont have kids saying something like that.
WHAT A DICK YOU ARE!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223167</id>
	<title>Re:Okay, and....?</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1244219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't mind paying a national sales tax or VAT tax on everything I buy.  The caveat is that the income tax goes away.  Taxing consumption seems fair to me.</p><p>Hell, if the local community wanted to put in fiber and then lease the lines out to whatever ISP I want, I would gladly pay an internet tax or sales tax on that at the local level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't mind paying a national sales tax or VAT tax on everything I buy .
The caveat is that the income tax goes away .
Taxing consumption seems fair to me.Hell , if the local community wanted to put in fiber and then lease the lines out to whatever ISP I want , I would gladly pay an internet tax or sales tax on that at the local level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't mind paying a national sales tax or VAT tax on everything I buy.
The caveat is that the income tax goes away.
Taxing consumption seems fair to me.Hell, if the local community wanted to put in fiber and then lease the lines out to whatever ISP I want, I would gladly pay an internet tax or sales tax on that at the local level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226873</id>
	<title>How about this</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1244235480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Instead of charging everyone $0.15 per month to protect children, why not charge $15 per month to let the pedos abuse children. I think that's better than someone without kids and no intention of having kids to pay to ease some dimwitted parent's fears.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of charging everyone $ 0.15 per month to protect children , why not charge $ 15 per month to let the pedos abuse children .
I think that 's better than someone without kids and no intention of having kids to pay to ease some dimwitted parent 's fears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of charging everyone $0.15 per month to protect children, why not charge $15 per month to let the pedos abuse children.
I think that's better than someone without kids and no intention of having kids to pay to ease some dimwitted parent's fears.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223647</id>
	<title>Re:"to fight online criminal activity"</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1244221380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>News flash, it to pay for enforcement, not deter criminals.</p></div><p>Don't be stupid.  What are they going to do with 15 cents a month?  They'd be able to buy a Peppermint Pattie from the cafeteria - that's about all you can do with 15 cents.  It would take them many, many months to accumulate enough money to fund anything worthwhile.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>News flash , it to pay for enforcement , not deter criminals.Do n't be stupid .
What are they going to do with 15 cents a month ?
They 'd be able to buy a Peppermint Pattie from the cafeteria - that 's about all you can do with 15 cents .
It would take them many , many months to accumulate enough money to fund anything worthwhile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>News flash, it to pay for enforcement, not deter criminals.Don't be stupid.
What are they going to do with 15 cents a month?
They'd be able to buy a Peppermint Pattie from the cafeteria - that's about all you can do with 15 cents.
It would take them many, many months to accumulate enough money to fund anything worthwhile.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222351</id>
	<title>Re:No Katrina money left?</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1244216580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What makes you think all that money went to Nagin?  This is America 2.0, of course it went to lobbyists and corporations to "rebuild."</htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think all that money went to Nagin ?
This is America 2.0 , of course it went to lobbyists and corporations to " rebuild .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think all that money went to Nagin?
This is America 2.0, of course it went to lobbyists and corporations to "rebuild.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226971</id>
	<title>The "Fair" Tax</title>
	<author>Obfuscant</author>
	<datestamp>1244192760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes"</i><p><i>

Deficit spending means we will bill today's children tomorrow,</i> </p><p>
Not deficit spending. If the Fair Tax gets enacted, the little bastards WILL be paying taxes on every penny of their allowance that they spend, at the same rate as every other person in the US. At something like 37\%.</p><p>
That's fair. Right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The lil ' bastards do n't even pay taxes " Deficit spending means we will bill today 's children tomorrow , Not deficit spending .
If the Fair Tax gets enacted , the little bastards WILL be paying taxes on every penny of their allowance that they spend , at the same rate as every other person in the US .
At something like 37 \ % .
That 's fair .
Right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The lil' bastards don't even pay taxes"

Deficit spending means we will bill today's children tomorrow, 
Not deficit spending.
If the Fair Tax gets enacted, the little bastards WILL be paying taxes on every penny of their allowance that they spend, at the same rate as every other person in the US.
At something like 37\%.
That's fair.
Right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223669</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome! Wait, Children's Protection?</title>
	<author>nxtw</author>
	<datestamp>1244221500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service. At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.</p></div></blockquote><p>But these taxes are typically allocated to:</p><ul><li>government services provided via phone (such as 911)</li><li> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal\_Service\_Fund" title="wikipedia.org">communication services for everyone</a> [wikipedia.org] </li><li> <a href="http://news.cnet.com/2100-1037\_3-6101004.html" title="cnet.com">the Spanish-American War</a> [cnet.com] </li><li>general funds for state &amp; local governments</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually yes...at least on the phone thing , most everywhere taxes phone service .
At least , according to any bill I 've ever had for a phone , landline or cell.But these taxes are typically allocated to : government services provided via phone ( such as 911 ) communication services for everyone [ wikipedia.org ] the Spanish-American War [ cnet.com ] general funds for state &amp; local governments</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually yes...at least on the phone thing, most everywhere taxes phone service.
At least, according to any bill I've ever had for a phone, landline or cell.But these taxes are typically allocated to:government services provided via phone (such as 911) communication services for everyone [wikipedia.org]  the Spanish-American War [cnet.com] general funds for state &amp; local governments
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221807</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28228211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220955
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226971
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220823
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223395
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221327
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222735
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220993
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221553
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223669
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223323
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_05_0535221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220769
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223523
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222351
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222843
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223681
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222855
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222343
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226061
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221669
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221051
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224289
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222633
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28229997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220945
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221865
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220795
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221105
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222865
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28228211
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221807
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223669
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221099
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28222735
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28226669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28221327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223395
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28223141
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28224735
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_05_0535221.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_05_0535221.28220789
</commentlist>
</conversation>
