<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_26_172248</id>
	<title>Amazon Cuts Off North Carolina Affiliates</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246042380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Amazon.com has reportedly <a href="http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/06/26/article/amazon\_cuts\_relationships\_with\_affiliates">cut off all affiliates in North Carolina</a> as a preemptive response to the sales tax change being pushed through the state legislature.  The Seattle-based online retailer <a href="http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/06/17/article/amazon\_warns\_nc\_affiliates\_about\_tax\_issue">warned affiliates last week</a> that such a move might be necessary, but the early shutoff seems to be a move in hopes of swaying opinion on the proposed legislation.  <i>"Local affiliates say they were 'blind-sided' by the company's action.  'I got this e-mail at 4:30 this morning,' said James Barrett, a technology consultant from Winston-Salem. 'It wasn't saying your account will be shut down. It said it is shut down. That just blew me up right there.'  Barrett said that he is frustrated at lawmakers for considering the tax, but equally aggravated with Amazon.  'They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said. 'I think that is pretty tacky. That's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amazon.com has reportedly cut off all affiliates in North Carolina as a preemptive response to the sales tax change being pushed through the state legislature .
The Seattle-based online retailer warned affiliates last week that such a move might be necessary , but the early shutoff seems to be a move in hopes of swaying opinion on the proposed legislation .
" Local affiliates say they were 'blind-sided ' by the company 's action .
'I got this e-mail at 4 : 30 this morning, ' said James Barrett , a technology consultant from Winston-Salem .
'It was n't saying your account will be shut down .
It said it is shut down .
That just blew me up right there .
' Barrett said that he is frustrated at lawmakers for considering the tax , but equally aggravated with Amazon .
'They 're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh, ' Barrett said .
'I think that is pretty tacky .
That 's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amazon.com has reportedly cut off all affiliates in North Carolina as a preemptive response to the sales tax change being pushed through the state legislature.
The Seattle-based online retailer warned affiliates last week that such a move might be necessary, but the early shutoff seems to be a move in hopes of swaying opinion on the proposed legislation.
"Local affiliates say they were 'blind-sided' by the company's action.
'I got this e-mail at 4:30 this morning,' said James Barrett, a technology consultant from Winston-Salem.
'It wasn't saying your account will be shut down.
It said it is shut down.
That just blew me up right there.
'  Barrett said that he is frustrated at lawmakers for considering the tax, but equally aggravated with Amazon.
'They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said.
'I think that is pretty tacky.
That's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487011</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>need4mospd</author>
	<datestamp>1246048740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How much notice did the NC legislators give Amazon? That would probably clue you in to why they only gave a one week notice. If Amazon didn't know about it beforehand, how could they possibly give a notice any sooner? Also, just because the government proposed a law, doesn't mean it's likely to pass. Maybe the lawyers determined they should send the letter out when they knew the law was more likely to pass.<p> I don't feel like RTFA(sue me) so sorry if that was already covered.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much notice did the NC legislators give Amazon ?
That would probably clue you in to why they only gave a one week notice .
If Amazon did n't know about it beforehand , how could they possibly give a notice any sooner ?
Also , just because the government proposed a law , does n't mean it 's likely to pass .
Maybe the lawyers determined they should send the letter out when they knew the law was more likely to pass .
I do n't feel like RTFA ( sue me ) so sorry if that was already covered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much notice did the NC legislators give Amazon?
That would probably clue you in to why they only gave a one week notice.
If Amazon didn't know about it beforehand, how could they possibly give a notice any sooner?
Also, just because the government proposed a law, doesn't mean it's likely to pass.
Maybe the lawyers determined they should send the letter out when they knew the law was more likely to pass.
I don't feel like RTFA(sue me) so sorry if that was already covered.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490225</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>superwiz</author>
	<datestamp>1246024260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know. Maybe an election? It could work...in theory</p></div><p>Election happens once every 2-4 years.  Purchase happens whenever you need something and you ELECT to purchase it.  That sure takes care of the "vote often" part.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know .
Maybe an election ?
It could work...in theoryElection happens once every 2-4 years .
Purchase happens whenever you need something and you ELECT to purchase it .
That sure takes care of the " vote often " part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know.
Maybe an election?
It could work...in theoryElection happens once every 2-4 years.
Purchase happens whenever you need something and you ELECT to purchase it.
That sure takes care of the "vote often" part.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>David Greene</author>
	<datestamp>1246049460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.</p></div><p>Well, we have the internet, databases and computers.  Automating this would not be difficult at all.  States/cities/etc. would submit their tax rates based on GIS data and the federal government could maintain a database searchable by merchants.  If the local units don't accurately represent their sales tax rates, then the onus is on them to fix it.</p><p>The technology is not a problem here.  We can solve that problem.  The real problem is a culture of disinvestment in our communities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.Well , we have the internet , databases and computers .
Automating this would not be difficult at all .
States/cities/etc. would submit their tax rates based on GIS data and the federal government could maintain a database searchable by merchants .
If the local units do n't accurately represent their sales tax rates , then the onus is on them to fix it.The technology is not a problem here .
We can solve that problem .
The real problem is a culture of disinvestment in our communities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.Well, we have the internet, databases and computers.
Automating this would not be difficult at all.
States/cities/etc. would submit their tax rates based on GIS data and the federal government could maintain a database searchable by merchants.
If the local units don't accurately represent their sales tax rates, then the onus is on them to fix it.The technology is not a problem here.
We can solve that problem.
The real problem is a culture of disinvestment in our communities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487333</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1246049760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of "income &amp; property tax revenues".</p></div></blockquote><p>Just how could I value these people for their humanity, when I have no idea if they are selfish twats or if they are decent human beings?  The only thing I can judge them on, from the information available to me, is their monetary value to the people who live in NJ.  They could be rapists or worse, for all we know.<br> <br>And as for NJ having a bad business climate... surely that's the reason so many businesses have moved to NJ, despite our tax climate being bad for decades?<br> <br>We have a bad <i>tax</i> climate for business.  On the other hand, we have great business climate in other areas, such as: education system, workforce quality, proximity to NY, proximity to ports, culture, etc.<br> <br>But go ahead, harp on NJ.  The more people that talk negatively about it, the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of " income &amp; property tax revenues " .Just how could I value these people for their humanity , when I have no idea if they are selfish twats or if they are decent human beings ?
The only thing I can judge them on , from the information available to me , is their monetary value to the people who live in NJ .
They could be rapists or worse , for all we know .
And as for NJ having a bad business climate... surely that 's the reason so many businesses have moved to NJ , despite our tax climate being bad for decades ?
We have a bad tax climate for business .
On the other hand , we have great business climate in other areas , such as : education system , workforce quality , proximity to NY , proximity to ports , culture , etc .
But go ahead , harp on NJ .
The more people that talk negatively about it , the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of "income &amp; property tax revenues".Just how could I value these people for their humanity, when I have no idea if they are selfish twats or if they are decent human beings?
The only thing I can judge them on, from the information available to me, is their monetary value to the people who live in NJ.
They could be rapists or worse, for all we know.
And as for NJ having a bad business climate... surely that's the reason so many businesses have moved to NJ, despite our tax climate being bad for decades?
We have a bad tax climate for business.
On the other hand, we have great business climate in other areas, such as: education system, workforce quality, proximity to NY, proximity to ports, culture, etc.
But go ahead, harp on NJ.
The more people that talk negatively about it, the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</id>
	<title>blindsided?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>1.  If any of these affiliates were blindsided, it is because they didn't read the notice they were given last week.  Of course, a single week's notice is too short anyway...<br> <br>2. Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate.  Or close up shop.  We'd be happy to have them (and their income &amp; property tax revenues) here in NJ.<br> <br>Of course, now it's only a matter of time before most states have similar laws.  Then it'll be time for these businesses to relocate to the Cayman Islands.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
If any of these affiliates were blindsided , it is because they did n't read the notice they were given last week .
Of course , a single week 's notice is too short anyway... 2. Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate .
Or close up shop .
We 'd be happy to have them ( and their income &amp; property tax revenues ) here in NJ .
Of course , now it 's only a matter of time before most states have similar laws .
Then it 'll be time for these businesses to relocate to the Cayman Islands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
If any of these affiliates were blindsided, it is because they didn't read the notice they were given last week.
Of course, a single week's notice is too short anyway... 2. Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate.
Or close up shop.
We'd be happy to have them (and their income &amp; property tax revenues) here in NJ.
Of course, now it's only a matter of time before most states have similar laws.
Then it'll be time for these businesses to relocate to the Cayman Islands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537</id>
	<title>The only way to make sure</title>
	<author>guruevi</author>
	<datestamp>1246046340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is by biting them where it hurts: their pockets. You can add all the sales tax on out-of-state purchases you want (whether that is federally allowed -- I'm not sure), if you don't sell anything, you don't have anything to tax so revenue will remain 0.</p><p>They probably saw what happened in NY and they don't want it to happen everywhere. Amazon decided to add tax to NY purchases and me and a lot of other people stopped purchasing from them because other stores (like NewEgg, TigerDirect and Geeks) were undercutting them by about 8\%. Even though my organization is tax exempt I don't purchase at Amazon simply because they don't have the provision for me to state that I am tax exempt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is by biting them where it hurts : their pockets .
You can add all the sales tax on out-of-state purchases you want ( whether that is federally allowed -- I 'm not sure ) , if you do n't sell anything , you do n't have anything to tax so revenue will remain 0.They probably saw what happened in NY and they do n't want it to happen everywhere .
Amazon decided to add tax to NY purchases and me and a lot of other people stopped purchasing from them because other stores ( like NewEgg , TigerDirect and Geeks ) were undercutting them by about 8 \ % .
Even though my organization is tax exempt I do n't purchase at Amazon simply because they do n't have the provision for me to state that I am tax exempt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is by biting them where it hurts: their pockets.
You can add all the sales tax on out-of-state purchases you want (whether that is federally allowed -- I'm not sure), if you don't sell anything, you don't have anything to tax so revenue will remain 0.They probably saw what happened in NY and they don't want it to happen everywhere.
Amazon decided to add tax to NY purchases and me and a lot of other people stopped purchasing from them because other stores (like NewEgg, TigerDirect and Geeks) were undercutting them by about 8\%.
Even though my organization is tax exempt I don't purchase at Amazon simply because they don't have the provision for me to state that I am tax exempt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488295</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>ink</author>
	<datestamp>1246010640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives.</p></div><p>Yes, clearly, <i>all</i> politicians lack personal integrity -- and if they had a profit motive they would be full of integrity.  &lt;/sarcasm&gt;
</p><p><div class="quote"><p>At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it.</p></div><p>Wait, I thought they had no profit motive...
</p><p>
Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity?  Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution, and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping, their customers will be more likely to patronize local business.  The same places that provide property tax and pay for things like schools.  I doubt this has anything to do with "campaign donors and higher pay", which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives.Yes , clearly , all politicians lack personal integrity -- and if they had a profit motive they would be full of integrity .
At every turn , government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it.Wait , I thought they had no profit motive.. . Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity ?
Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution , and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping , their customers will be more likely to patronize local business .
The same places that provide property tax and pay for things like schools .
I doubt this has anything to do with " campaign donors and higher pay " , which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives.Yes, clearly, all politicians lack personal integrity -- and if they had a profit motive they would be full of integrity.
At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it.Wait, I thought they had no profit motive...

Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity?
Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution, and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping, their customers will be more likely to patronize local business.
The same places that provide property tax and pay for things like schools.
I doubt this has anything to do with "campaign donors and higher pay", which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487323</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1246049760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[quote]<br>2. Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate. Or close up shop. We'd be happy to have them (and their income &amp; property tax revenues) here in NJ.<br>[/quote]</p><p>Given the brutal property and income tax situation in New Jersey, they'd be better off moving a few miles to South Carolina.</p><p>I'm from New Jersey, lived in both Carolinas, and retired in SC so I get to keep more of my income.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ quote ] 2 .
Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate .
Or close up shop .
We 'd be happy to have them ( and their income &amp; property tax revenues ) here in NJ .
[ /quote ] Given the brutal property and income tax situation in New Jersey , they 'd be better off moving a few miles to South Carolina.I 'm from New Jersey , lived in both Carolinas , and retired in SC so I get to keep more of my income .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[quote]2.
Time for the referral businesses in NC to relocate.
Or close up shop.
We'd be happy to have them (and their income &amp; property tax revenues) here in NJ.
[/quote]Given the brutal property and income tax situation in New Jersey, they'd be better off moving a few miles to South Carolina.I'm from New Jersey, lived in both Carolinas, and retired in SC so I get to keep more of my income.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489363</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>xmundt</author>
	<datestamp>1246016640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Greetings and Salutations...<br>A good point.    My usual mantra for this is "money to a politician is like crack to an addict".    There is never enough, they can never GET enough and they will sell their daughters into BDSM prostitution to get more of it.<br>pleasant dreams<br>dave mundt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Greetings and Salutations...A good point .
My usual mantra for this is " money to a politician is like crack to an addict " .
There is never enough , they can never GET enough and they will sell their daughters into BDSM prostitution to get more of it.pleasant dreamsdave mundt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Greetings and Salutations...A good point.
My usual mantra for this is "money to a politician is like crack to an addict".
There is never enough, they can never GET enough and they will sell their daughters into BDSM prostitution to get more of it.pleasant dreamsdave mundt</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487517</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>superwiz</author>
	<datestamp>1246007340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amazon does not use any resources provided by the local state government.  And yet they would be expected to pay for them?  That's called "theft".  They use no public roads (delivery companies pay for those through gasoline taxes and vehicle registration payments).  They use no police services (they have no physical presence in NC so they have nothing to protect there).  They can't take advantage of NC education (since they don't live there, their children can't go to school there).  And yet NC thinks they have the right to shake down Amazon?  Every honest men hopes this withdrawal of Amazon affiliation takes as heavy toll on NC economy as possible.  This type of punishment of thieves would only be just.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amazon does not use any resources provided by the local state government .
And yet they would be expected to pay for them ?
That 's called " theft " .
They use no public roads ( delivery companies pay for those through gasoline taxes and vehicle registration payments ) .
They use no police services ( they have no physical presence in NC so they have nothing to protect there ) .
They ca n't take advantage of NC education ( since they do n't live there , their children ca n't go to school there ) .
And yet NC thinks they have the right to shake down Amazon ?
Every honest men hopes this withdrawal of Amazon affiliation takes as heavy toll on NC economy as possible .
This type of punishment of thieves would only be just .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amazon does not use any resources provided by the local state government.
And yet they would be expected to pay for them?
That's called "theft".
They use no public roads (delivery companies pay for those through gasoline taxes and vehicle registration payments).
They use no police services (they have no physical presence in NC so they have nothing to protect there).
They can't take advantage of NC education (since they don't live there, their children can't go to school there).
And yet NC thinks they have the right to shake down Amazon?
Every honest men hopes this withdrawal of Amazon affiliation takes as heavy toll on NC economy as possible.
This type of punishment of thieves would only be just.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487049</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Chabil Ha'</author>
	<datestamp>1246048860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too bad it has to be that way, but it is much easier to kill a bill than to kill the resultant law.  I hope NC's (attempted) money grab was worth it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad it has to be that way , but it is much easier to kill a bill than to kill the resultant law .
I hope NC 's ( attempted ) money grab was worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad it has to be that way, but it is much easier to kill a bill than to kill the resultant law.
I hope NC's (attempted) money grab was worth it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488809</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246013400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level (and keeping up to date) would be overwhelming. The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that's what Amazon did.</p></div></blockquote><p>McDonalds and Walmart both seem to do it pretty well in coping with interstate, even global tax issues, not exactly sure why I company built on powerful computing technology should find it more difficult than a burger joint.</p><p>They can sell processing time on their massive under utilized computing clusters, but they can't calculate and accrue sales tax for customers they have an address for?</p><p>Wheres the punchline for your joke, I'm afraid I missed it somewhere?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level ( and keeping up to date ) would be overwhelming .
The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that 's what Amazon did.McDonalds and Walmart both seem to do it pretty well in coping with interstate , even global tax issues , not exactly sure why I company built on powerful computing technology should find it more difficult than a burger joint.They can sell processing time on their massive under utilized computing clusters , but they ca n't calculate and accrue sales tax for customers they have an address for ? Wheres the punchline for your joke , I 'm afraid I missed it somewhere ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level (and keeping up to date) would be overwhelming.
The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that's what Amazon did.McDonalds and Walmart both seem to do it pretty well in coping with interstate, even global tax issues, not exactly sure why I company built on powerful computing technology should find it more difficult than a burger joint.They can sell processing time on their massive under utilized computing clusters, but they can't calculate and accrue sales tax for customers they have an address for?Wheres the punchline for your joke, I'm afraid I missed it somewhere?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>timepilot</author>
	<datestamp>1246048560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you read the heartland.org article? It doesn't say that "New Jersey has the worst business climate," it says that "New Jersey has the worst business TAX climate."</p><p>Big difference. This statement is based primarily on the breadth of the sales tax base.</p><p>NJ doesn't tax toilet paper, food, or clothing. This places more of a tax burden on people buying TVs and cars, and less on people buying things like cereal for their kids. If that means NJ has a bad business tax climate, so what?</p><p>Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for my TV knowing that people who can't afford TVs didn't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you read the heartland.org article ?
It does n't say that " New Jersey has the worst business climate , " it says that " New Jersey has the worst business TAX climate .
" Big difference .
This statement is based primarily on the breadth of the sales tax base.NJ does n't tax toilet paper , food , or clothing .
This places more of a tax burden on people buying TVs and cars , and less on people buying things like cereal for their kids .
If that means NJ has a bad business tax climate , so what ? Honestly , I 'd rather pay 7 \ % for my TV knowing that people who ca n't afford TVs did n't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you read the heartland.org article?
It doesn't say that "New Jersey has the worst business climate," it says that "New Jersey has the worst business TAX climate.
"Big difference.
This statement is based primarily on the breadth of the sales tax base.NJ doesn't tax toilet paper, food, or clothing.
This places more of a tax burden on people buying TVs and cars, and less on people buying things like cereal for their kids.
If that means NJ has a bad business tax climate, so what?Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for my TV knowing that people who can't afford TVs didn't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488645</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246012440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Green Day wouldn't have done that before iTunes.  Don't think of them as all bad ass for standing up to the man, they didn't stand up to the man, the stood up to the guy who got ran over by the man.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Green Day would n't have done that before iTunes .
Do n't think of them as all bad ass for standing up to the man , they did n't stand up to the man , the stood up to the guy who got ran over by the man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Green Day wouldn't have done that before iTunes.
Don't think of them as all bad ass for standing up to the man, they didn't stand up to the man, the stood up to the guy who got ran over by the man.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523627</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>bkpark</author>
	<datestamp>1246290840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is not the online retailers that are leaching, it is the people who buy from them and don't pay the tax themselves. Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.</p></div><p>The buyers are not leeches either. Do you have any idea what a horrible inconvenience it would be to keep a record of everything I buy online (and keep record of whether I paid tax on it already or not) so that I can pay a lump sum at the end of the year? As a resident of a state with one of those useless "use tax" (California), I can say that no one without an accounting department pays for those things or bothers listing it in the tax return.</p><p>The real leech is the state governments. Instead of curbing their excesses, they are trying to live off of those who do not rely on their so-called "services". As someone else mentioned, the only thing online retailers cost the state is infrastructure for roads and internet&mdash;and I am sure all the shipping companies and ISPs based in the state pay their fair share of the tax necessary for maintaining those infrastructures, if any, and the fair share for the out-of-state sellers and in-state buyers is zero.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not the online retailers that are leaching , it is the people who buy from them and do n't pay the tax themselves .
Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.The buyers are not leeches either .
Do you have any idea what a horrible inconvenience it would be to keep a record of everything I buy online ( and keep record of whether I paid tax on it already or not ) so that I can pay a lump sum at the end of the year ?
As a resident of a state with one of those useless " use tax " ( California ) , I can say that no one without an accounting department pays for those things or bothers listing it in the tax return.The real leech is the state governments .
Instead of curbing their excesses , they are trying to live off of those who do not rely on their so-called " services " .
As someone else mentioned , the only thing online retailers cost the state is infrastructure for roads and internet    and I am sure all the shipping companies and ISPs based in the state pay their fair share of the tax necessary for maintaining those infrastructures , if any , and the fair share for the out-of-state sellers and in-state buyers is zero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not the online retailers that are leaching, it is the people who buy from them and don't pay the tax themselves.
Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.The buyers are not leeches either.
Do you have any idea what a horrible inconvenience it would be to keep a record of everything I buy online (and keep record of whether I paid tax on it already or not) so that I can pay a lump sum at the end of the year?
As a resident of a state with one of those useless "use tax" (California), I can say that no one without an accounting department pays for those things or bothers listing it in the tax return.The real leech is the state governments.
Instead of curbing their excesses, they are trying to live off of those who do not rely on their so-called "services".
As someone else mentioned, the only thing online retailers cost the state is infrastructure for roads and internet—and I am sure all the shipping companies and ISPs based in the state pay their fair share of the tax necessary for maintaining those infrastructures, if any, and the fair share for the out-of-state sellers and in-state buyers is zero.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So set up a service bureau to sell the data with online access if necessary.  It's not that hard.  There are companies that collect and sell medical, drug, legal, and tax law information already.  I'm sure Intuit could come up with an add-on service for state and local tax rates based on address.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So set up a service bureau to sell the data with online access if necessary .
It 's not that hard .
There are companies that collect and sell medical , drug , legal , and tax law information already .
I 'm sure Intuit could come up with an add-on service for state and local tax rates based on address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So set up a service bureau to sell the data with online access if necessary.
It's not that hard.
There are companies that collect and sell medical, drug, legal, and tax law information already.
I'm sure Intuit could come up with an add-on service for state and local tax rates based on address.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491599</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>demonlapin</author>
	<datestamp>1246038420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>NJ doesn't tax toilet paper, food, or clothing.</p></div></blockquote><p>Are you sure? Has this changed? I had a friend in college who had worked, during high school, in a NJ pharmacy that was still in the pre-scanner era (this was early 90s).  Anyway, in the eyes of the state of NJ, while toothbrushes were a non-taxed "necessity", toothpaste was not.  ISTR that she also said that toilet tissue was not considered a "necessary" item.  She always thought that was a bizarre bit of logic.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NJ does n't tax toilet paper , food , or clothing.Are you sure ?
Has this changed ?
I had a friend in college who had worked , during high school , in a NJ pharmacy that was still in the pre-scanner era ( this was early 90s ) .
Anyway , in the eyes of the state of NJ , while toothbrushes were a non-taxed " necessity " , toothpaste was not .
ISTR that she also said that toilet tissue was not considered a " necessary " item .
She always thought that was a bizarre bit of logic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NJ doesn't tax toilet paper, food, or clothing.Are you sure?
Has this changed?
I had a friend in college who had worked, during high school, in a NJ pharmacy that was still in the pre-scanner era (this was early 90s).
Anyway, in the eyes of the state of NJ, while toothbrushes were a non-taxed "necessity", toothpaste was not.
ISTR that she also said that toilet tissue was not considered a "necessary" item.
She always thought that was a bizarre bit of logic.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488397</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246011000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They didn't move out.  The just stopped doing business with a select portion of their customer base.  They still are selling to customers in North Carolina, they just aren't dealing with advertisers in North Carolina.</p><p>They are just bullying NC vendors in an attempt to get thier way and continue to use a loophole to avoid having to pay the same thing every other interstate business has to pay.</p><p>They don't have the balls to make an actual stand like you know, not selling to NC residents anymore.</p><p>This is just a 'we don't want to play fair so we're going to beat up your little sister' bullshit.</p><p>They aren't voting with their feet, they're extorting vendors in NC to vote for them.  Big difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't move out .
The just stopped doing business with a select portion of their customer base .
They still are selling to customers in North Carolina , they just are n't dealing with advertisers in North Carolina.They are just bullying NC vendors in an attempt to get thier way and continue to use a loophole to avoid having to pay the same thing every other interstate business has to pay.They do n't have the balls to make an actual stand like you know , not selling to NC residents anymore.This is just a 'we do n't want to play fair so we 're going to beat up your little sister ' bullshit.They are n't voting with their feet , they 're extorting vendors in NC to vote for them .
Big difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't move out.
The just stopped doing business with a select portion of their customer base.
They still are selling to customers in North Carolina, they just aren't dealing with advertisers in North Carolina.They are just bullying NC vendors in an attempt to get thier way and continue to use a loophole to avoid having to pay the same thing every other interstate business has to pay.They don't have the balls to make an actual stand like you know, not selling to NC residents anymore.This is just a 'we don't want to play fair so we're going to beat up your little sister' bullshit.They aren't voting with their feet, they're extorting vendors in NC to vote for them.
Big difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488591</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1246012140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's much cheaper for the company to just leave the state than it is to sign up for yet another third party vendor to manage it's tax locations database.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's much cheaper for the company to just leave the state than it is to sign up for yet another third party vendor to manage it 's tax locations database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's much cheaper for the company to just leave the state than it is to sign up for yet another third party vendor to manage it's tax locations database.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497831</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246097760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you'd like, I can open my copy of QuickBooks and tell you, but I'm guessing you just didn't realize that this trivial problem was solved years ago and is as simple as buying just about any accounting software package known to man and keeping the tax tables up to date yearly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 'd like , I can open my copy of QuickBooks and tell you , but I 'm guessing you just did n't realize that this trivial problem was solved years ago and is as simple as buying just about any accounting software package known to man and keeping the tax tables up to date yearly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you'd like, I can open my copy of QuickBooks and tell you, but I'm guessing you just didn't realize that this trivial problem was solved years ago and is as simple as buying just about any accounting software package known to man and keeping the tax tables up to date yearly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523457</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>bkpark</author>
	<datestamp>1246289400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To the contrary, the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes. There's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.</p></div><p>And ignore the Boston tea party? Ignore all the opposition to the stamp act? Ignore all the sentiments that actually brought this nation into existence?</p><p>You are right that United States was set up as a nation of law with one supreme law of the land, the Constitution&mdash;but that supreme law was meant to restrain the government from hurting her people, not the other way around. In fact, if we undo a lot of damages to the constitution done in the last century, we shouldn't even have income tax&mdash;and at least around the time when they passed the 16th amendment, people felt strongly enough about the constitution that they recognized, under the existing constitution, the federal government had absolutely no right to tax personal (or corporate) income&mdash;just as NC has no right to tax an entity incorporated in the state of Washington (if they want to tax NC affiliates selling to NC buyers, well, do that&mdash;they have no authority to drag in Amazon or anyone else not in the state). These days we just "reinterpret" the Constitution and let the federal government ban whatever they want and regulate whatever they want, whether they are authorized by the Constitution or not (by the 10th amendment, if it's not in the Constitution, then the federal government cannot do it).</p><p>United States is definitely an anti-tax, anti-welfare-state nation (at least it was until the turn of last century). The "rule of law" that we are so fond of is meant as a restraint on those in power, not an iron boot upon the faces of the citizens at large (to which every private entrepreneur belongs, regardless of how rich he is).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To the contrary , the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes .
There 's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.And ignore the Boston tea party ?
Ignore all the opposition to the stamp act ?
Ignore all the sentiments that actually brought this nation into existence ? You are right that United States was set up as a nation of law with one supreme law of the land , the Constitution    but that supreme law was meant to restrain the government from hurting her people , not the other way around .
In fact , if we undo a lot of damages to the constitution done in the last century , we should n't even have income tax    and at least around the time when they passed the 16th amendment , people felt strongly enough about the constitution that they recognized , under the existing constitution , the federal government had absolutely no right to tax personal ( or corporate ) income    just as NC has no right to tax an entity incorporated in the state of Washington ( if they want to tax NC affiliates selling to NC buyers , well , do that    they have no authority to drag in Amazon or anyone else not in the state ) .
These days we just " reinterpret " the Constitution and let the federal government ban whatever they want and regulate whatever they want , whether they are authorized by the Constitution or not ( by the 10th amendment , if it 's not in the Constitution , then the federal government can not do it ) .United States is definitely an anti-tax , anti-welfare-state nation ( at least it was until the turn of last century ) .
The " rule of law " that we are so fond of is meant as a restraint on those in power , not an iron boot upon the faces of the citizens at large ( to which every private entrepreneur belongs , regardless of how rich he is ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To the contrary, the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes.
There's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.And ignore the Boston tea party?
Ignore all the opposition to the stamp act?
Ignore all the sentiments that actually brought this nation into existence?You are right that United States was set up as a nation of law with one supreme law of the land, the Constitution—but that supreme law was meant to restrain the government from hurting her people, not the other way around.
In fact, if we undo a lot of damages to the constitution done in the last century, we shouldn't even have income tax—and at least around the time when they passed the 16th amendment, people felt strongly enough about the constitution that they recognized, under the existing constitution, the federal government had absolutely no right to tax personal (or corporate) income—just as NC has no right to tax an entity incorporated in the state of Washington (if they want to tax NC affiliates selling to NC buyers, well, do that—they have no authority to drag in Amazon or anyone else not in the state).
These days we just "reinterpret" the Constitution and let the federal government ban whatever they want and regulate whatever they want, whether they are authorized by the Constitution or not (by the 10th amendment, if it's not in the Constitution, then the federal government cannot do it).United States is definitely an anti-tax, anti-welfare-state nation (at least it was until the turn of last century).
The "rule of law" that we are so fond of is meant as a restraint on those in power, not an iron boot upon the faces of the citizens at large (to which every private entrepreneur belongs, regardless of how rich he is).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486733</id>
	<title>not tacky</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1246047300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said. 'I think that is pretty tacky.</i></p><p>Sounds like an excellent way to motivate your local associates to get their arses over to the capital and ride their representatives.  There's not a great deal Amazon can do directly to fix this, they have to <b> <i>rely</i> </b> on their local affiliates to keep the local conditions amicable to their business.  If the locals aren't moving, then it's time to light a fire under them.</p><p>Got their attention too didn't it?  Sounds like it's working as intended to me...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh, ' Barrett said .
'I think that is pretty tacky.Sounds like an excellent way to motivate your local associates to get their arses over to the capital and ride their representatives .
There 's not a great deal Amazon can do directly to fix this , they have to rely on their local affiliates to keep the local conditions amicable to their business .
If the locals are n't moving , then it 's time to light a fire under them.Got their attention too did n't it ?
Sounds like it 's working as intended to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said.
'I think that is pretty tacky.Sounds like an excellent way to motivate your local associates to get their arses over to the capital and ride their representatives.
There's not a great deal Amazon can do directly to fix this, they have to  rely  on their local affiliates to keep the local conditions amicable to their business.
If the locals aren't moving, then it's time to light a fire under them.Got their attention too didn't it?
Sounds like it's working as intended to me...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494599</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246116360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I looked carefully at the US constitution and I saw words like justice and liberty. To me these are far more more important government goals than "efficiency".<br>People have been complaining about taxes for thousands of years. Lets move on to something new.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I looked carefully at the US constitution and I saw words like justice and liberty .
To me these are far more more important government goals than " efficiency " .People have been complaining about taxes for thousands of years .
Lets move on to something new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I looked carefully at the US constitution and I saw words like justice and liberty.
To me these are far more more important government goals than "efficiency".People have been complaining about taxes for thousands of years.
Lets move on to something new.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487135</id>
	<title>Re:Bravo North Carolina.</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1246049220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Aside from taxes, they also help set the general business climate.  Right to work, beaurocracy, regulations, etc.  Of course, the same attitude that produces high taxes also produces an unfavorable economic climate for anyone who isn't rich and liberal, in the name of everyone else who suffers for it.  While most states are seeing budget shortfalls in the recession/depression, the ones that are suffering the most previously drove out businesses and expanded government largess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from taxes , they also help set the general business climate .
Right to work , beaurocracy , regulations , etc .
Of course , the same attitude that produces high taxes also produces an unfavorable economic climate for anyone who is n't rich and liberal , in the name of everyone else who suffers for it .
While most states are seeing budget shortfalls in the recession/depression , the ones that are suffering the most previously drove out businesses and expanded government largess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from taxes, they also help set the general business climate.
Right to work, beaurocracy, regulations, etc.
Of course, the same attitude that produces high taxes also produces an unfavorable economic climate for anyone who isn't rich and liberal, in the name of everyone else who suffers for it.
While most states are seeing budget shortfalls in the recession/depression, the ones that are suffering the most previously drove out businesses and expanded government largess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490209</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246024020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, all the united States are becoming one big collective shithole.</p><p>Time to leave.  I'm considering seasteading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , all the united States are becoming one big collective shithole.Time to leave .
I 'm considering seasteading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, all the united States are becoming one big collective shithole.Time to leave.
I'm considering seasteading.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755</id>
	<title>Bravo North Carolina.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.</p><p>Hope they enjoy no Amazon-related resellers operating in their state.</p><p>Taxes are how states compete for business.  Raise taxes on a business that can operate anywhere else and avoid the tax, guess what?  They are leaving town.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.Hope they enjoy no Amazon-related resellers operating in their state.Taxes are how states compete for business .
Raise taxes on a business that can operate anywhere else and avoid the tax , guess what ?
They are leaving town .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.Hope they enjoy no Amazon-related resellers operating in their state.Taxes are how states compete for business.
Raise taxes on a business that can operate anywhere else and avoid the tax, guess what?
They are leaving town.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487403</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Maximum Prophet</author>
	<datestamp>1246006800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This shuts down any business that's too small to hire the service bureau.  They exist.  I know a guy who did $50 worth of photography business in one year.  He claimed it to the IRS, and when he was audited, the auditor said, "You don't make much money on photography, do you?"  (no sh*t)
<br> <br>
The solution is to exempt really small businesses, but they don't want people to try to run 1000 small businesses that make less than $1000 each.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This shuts down any business that 's too small to hire the service bureau .
They exist .
I know a guy who did $ 50 worth of photography business in one year .
He claimed it to the IRS , and when he was audited , the auditor said , " You do n't make much money on photography , do you ?
" ( no sh * t ) The solution is to exempt really small businesses , but they do n't want people to try to run 1000 small businesses that make less than $ 1000 each .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This shuts down any business that's too small to hire the service bureau.
They exist.
I know a guy who did $50 worth of photography business in one year.
He claimed it to the IRS, and when he was audited, the auditor said, "You don't make much money on photography, do you?
"  (no sh*t)
 
The solution is to exempt really small businesses, but they don't want people to try to run 1000 small businesses that make less than $1000 each.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490021</id>
	<title>slashdotters don't like taxes</title>
	<author>sugarmotor</author>
	<datestamp>1246021800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see a lot of cheap anger in the comments here about paying taxes.</p><p>I don't think there's much wrong with a government collecting taxes.</p><p>What is wrong in the US however, is the insane level of military spending, and recently those insane bail-out amounts. That's what should elicit anger.</p><p>Other than that I look at taxes as a pitch-in -- collect money from everyone, and build something that individuals couldn't by themselves. The complaints about paying taxes always strike me as petty.</p><p>I see a correlation between the low tax levels in the US (and the above mentioned insane waste of these low taxes), and the low quality of infrastructure in the US: bad roads, bad sidewalks, cheap / non-existent bus service, a completely ridiculous public school system.</p><p>I also think this is a cheap trick of Amazon. Businesses in general don't like to pay taxes, but reap all the benefits of the infrastructure that they pay for. They do like the free-ride.</p><p>Have a nice weekend !</p><p>Stephan</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see a lot of cheap anger in the comments here about paying taxes.I do n't think there 's much wrong with a government collecting taxes.What is wrong in the US however , is the insane level of military spending , and recently those insane bail-out amounts .
That 's what should elicit anger.Other than that I look at taxes as a pitch-in -- collect money from everyone , and build something that individuals could n't by themselves .
The complaints about paying taxes always strike me as petty.I see a correlation between the low tax levels in the US ( and the above mentioned insane waste of these low taxes ) , and the low quality of infrastructure in the US : bad roads , bad sidewalks , cheap / non-existent bus service , a completely ridiculous public school system.I also think this is a cheap trick of Amazon .
Businesses in general do n't like to pay taxes , but reap all the benefits of the infrastructure that they pay for .
They do like the free-ride.Have a nice weekend ! Stephan</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see a lot of cheap anger in the comments here about paying taxes.I don't think there's much wrong with a government collecting taxes.What is wrong in the US however, is the insane level of military spending, and recently those insane bail-out amounts.
That's what should elicit anger.Other than that I look at taxes as a pitch-in -- collect money from everyone, and build something that individuals couldn't by themselves.
The complaints about paying taxes always strike me as petty.I see a correlation between the low tax levels in the US (and the above mentioned insane waste of these low taxes), and the low quality of infrastructure in the US: bad roads, bad sidewalks, cheap / non-existent bus service, a completely ridiculous public school system.I also think this is a cheap trick of Amazon.
Businesses in general don't like to pay taxes, but reap all the benefits of the infrastructure that they pay for.
They do like the free-ride.Have a nice weekend !Stephan</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511</id>
	<title>Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>infinite9</author>
	<datestamp>1246046220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... even if it is a bit assholeish.  It sends a loud and clear message to the NC government that the legislation will hurt local businesses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... even if it is a bit assholeish .
It sends a loud and clear message to the NC government that the legislation will hurt local businesses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... even if it is a bit assholeish.
It sends a loud and clear message to the NC government that the legislation will hurt local businesses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491593</id>
	<title>Good for Amazon</title>
	<author>PortHaven</author>
	<datestamp>1246038360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's kind of neat to see large companies that are actually able to tell a state to !@#$\% off in a good way.</p><p>Right now we have a government that is running our nation's economy into the ground. And their solution is to raise taxes and essentially kill those business that are actually doing well. Those that are managing but not doing great will die under such programs. This will further tank the economy, than those were doing well will start to struggle. Revenues to the government tax coffers will go down. So they will in turn raise more taxes and further kill the economy.</p><p>Come on, everyone in Congress should have to play SimCity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kind of neat to see large companies that are actually able to tell a state to !
@ # $ \ % off in a good way.Right now we have a government that is running our nation 's economy into the ground .
And their solution is to raise taxes and essentially kill those business that are actually doing well .
Those that are managing but not doing great will die under such programs .
This will further tank the economy , than those were doing well will start to struggle .
Revenues to the government tax coffers will go down .
So they will in turn raise more taxes and further kill the economy.Come on , everyone in Congress should have to play SimCity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kind of neat to see large companies that are actually able to tell a state to !
@#$\% off in a good way.Right now we have a government that is running our nation's economy into the ground.
And their solution is to raise taxes and essentially kill those business that are actually doing well.
Those that are managing but not doing great will die under such programs.
This will further tank the economy, than those were doing well will start to struggle.
Revenues to the government tax coffers will go down.
So they will in turn raise more taxes and further kill the economy.Come on, everyone in Congress should have to play SimCity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497101</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246093320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong.  You aren't taxing them 3 times, you are taxing them once on the affiliate transaction.</p><p>Amazon doesn't tax the people.</p><p>You don't make the sale, you refer them to Amazon who makes the sale.</p><p>The tax is on the revenue presented back to the affiliate.</p><p>The store in NC isn't being taxed on the $90 that amazon made, its being taxed on the $0.25 that amazon gave them for refering the sale.</p><p>I've worked for businesses that didn't pay taxes for years due to their poor performance.  Yes you still have to pay payroll taxes and other employement related things, but thats completely seperate from sales tax isn't it.</p><p>Besides, jackass, its not like you pay the sales tax, you fucking charge it directly to the customers anyway.  You aren't losing money, you're passing it through.  It was never part of your profit anyway, stop acting like they were taking something from you douchebag, it wasn't yours to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong .
You are n't taxing them 3 times , you are taxing them once on the affiliate transaction.Amazon does n't tax the people.You do n't make the sale , you refer them to Amazon who makes the sale.The tax is on the revenue presented back to the affiliate.The store in NC is n't being taxed on the $ 90 that amazon made , its being taxed on the $ 0.25 that amazon gave them for refering the sale.I 've worked for businesses that did n't pay taxes for years due to their poor performance .
Yes you still have to pay payroll taxes and other employement related things , but thats completely seperate from sales tax is n't it.Besides , jackass , its not like you pay the sales tax , you fucking charge it directly to the customers anyway .
You are n't losing money , you 're passing it through .
It was never part of your profit anyway , stop acting like they were taking something from you douchebag , it was n't yours to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.
You aren't taxing them 3 times, you are taxing them once on the affiliate transaction.Amazon doesn't tax the people.You don't make the sale, you refer them to Amazon who makes the sale.The tax is on the revenue presented back to the affiliate.The store in NC isn't being taxed on the $90 that amazon made, its being taxed on the $0.25 that amazon gave them for refering the sale.I've worked for businesses that didn't pay taxes for years due to their poor performance.
Yes you still have to pay payroll taxes and other employement related things, but thats completely seperate from sales tax isn't it.Besides, jackass, its not like you pay the sales tax, you fucking charge it directly to the customers anyway.
You aren't losing money, you're passing it through.
It was never part of your profit anyway, stop acting like they were taking something from you douchebag, it wasn't yours to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488905</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>m\_c\_rose</author>
	<datestamp>1246013880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a previous poster said there are solutions for this already, such as Vertex Inc [vertexinc.com] and Taxware [adp.com] Companys all over the world have to deal with local tax authorities. How do you think companies like Walmart or McDonald's handle this, do you think they have their local managers tracking tax code? No they have an application that plugs directly into there ERP application which is connected with all their branches and mikely connected directly to their POS system to insure the proper taxes are being charged.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a previous poster said there are solutions for this already , such as Vertex Inc [ vertexinc.com ] and Taxware [ adp.com ] Companys all over the world have to deal with local tax authorities .
How do you think companies like Walmart or McDonald 's handle this , do you think they have their local managers tracking tax code ?
No they have an application that plugs directly into there ERP application which is connected with all their branches and mikely connected directly to their POS system to insure the proper taxes are being charged .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a previous poster said there are solutions for this already, such as Vertex Inc [vertexinc.com] and Taxware [adp.com] Companys all over the world have to deal with local tax authorities.
How do you think companies like Walmart or McDonald's handle this, do you think they have their local managers tracking tax code?
No they have an application that plugs directly into there ERP application which is connected with all their branches and mikely connected directly to their POS system to insure the proper taxes are being charged.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486465</id>
	<title>For workers revolution against capitalist anarchy!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Build a Leninist-Trotskyist vanguard party! Socialism or Barbarism!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Build a Leninist-Trotskyist vanguard party !
Socialism or Barbarism !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Build a Leninist-Trotskyist vanguard party!
Socialism or Barbarism!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491515</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>demonlapin</author>
	<datestamp>1246037880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wal-Mart has stores that presumably benefit from police, fire, and emergency medical services.  Those stores occupy space which is actually in North Carolina, and can be sold to other people interested in owning a bit of North Carolina should the land become more valuable than a Wal-Mart.  IOW, they actually do business <i>in North Carolina</i>.  I don't buy soft drinks, potato chips, or fresh meat and cheese off Amazon - I buy them at my local grocery store, because they are heavy or perishable goods that cost a fortune to ship in anything other than massive quantities - and because I like to look at what I'm buying.  For books and music, Amazon is often less expensive, but my local bookstore gives me a book right now AND lets me try before I buy!<br> <br>So why does Amazon owe a nickel to North Carolina? Just because individual North Carolinians like their stuff?  The only part of the Amazon food chain that costs NC a penny is delivery - and UPS, FedEx, and DHL all have physical presences and pay taxes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wal-Mart has stores that presumably benefit from police , fire , and emergency medical services .
Those stores occupy space which is actually in North Carolina , and can be sold to other people interested in owning a bit of North Carolina should the land become more valuable than a Wal-Mart .
IOW , they actually do business in North Carolina .
I do n't buy soft drinks , potato chips , or fresh meat and cheese off Amazon - I buy them at my local grocery store , because they are heavy or perishable goods that cost a fortune to ship in anything other than massive quantities - and because I like to look at what I 'm buying .
For books and music , Amazon is often less expensive , but my local bookstore gives me a book right now AND lets me try before I buy !
So why does Amazon owe a nickel to North Carolina ?
Just because individual North Carolinians like their stuff ?
The only part of the Amazon food chain that costs NC a penny is delivery - and UPS , FedEx , and DHL all have physical presences and pay taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wal-Mart has stores that presumably benefit from police, fire, and emergency medical services.
Those stores occupy space which is actually in North Carolina, and can be sold to other people interested in owning a bit of North Carolina should the land become more valuable than a Wal-Mart.
IOW, they actually do business in North Carolina.
I don't buy soft drinks, potato chips, or fresh meat and cheese off Amazon - I buy them at my local grocery store, because they are heavy or perishable goods that cost a fortune to ship in anything other than massive quantities - and because I like to look at what I'm buying.
For books and music, Amazon is often less expensive, but my local bookstore gives me a book right now AND lets me try before I buy!
So why does Amazon owe a nickel to North Carolina?
Just because individual North Carolinians like their stuff?
The only part of the Amazon food chain that costs NC a penny is delivery - and UPS, FedEx, and DHL all have physical presences and pay taxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Todd Knarr</author>
	<datestamp>1246047660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK then, riddle me this: what is the sales tax rate for any address in the US? Note that you can't stop at the city plus ZIP code level, in San Diego County there are ZIP codes that're partly in a city (where city sales tax applies) and partly outside the city (where city sales tax <i>does not</i> apply). Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address? I don't know of any, and it's just not reasonable to require a company to pay sales tax without giving them a way to find out <i>how much</i> sales tax they're supposed to collect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK then , riddle me this : what is the sales tax rate for any address in the US ?
Note that you ca n't stop at the city plus ZIP code level , in San Diego County there are ZIP codes that 're partly in a city ( where city sales tax applies ) and partly outside the city ( where city sales tax does not apply ) .
Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address ?
I do n't know of any , and it 's just not reasonable to require a company to pay sales tax without giving them a way to find out how much sales tax they 're supposed to collect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK then, riddle me this: what is the sales tax rate for any address in the US?
Note that you can't stop at the city plus ZIP code level, in San Diego County there are ZIP codes that're partly in a city (where city sales tax applies) and partly outside the city (where city sales tax does not apply).
Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address?
I don't know of any, and it's just not reasonable to require a company to pay sales tax without giving them a way to find out how much sales tax they're supposed to collect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490651</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246028520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere."<br><br>In reality government workers are generally better off than workers in the private sector. They make nice salaries, are damned near impossible to fire, have defined-benefit retirement after a set number of years, and generally do less work than anyone in the private sector. How many of you private sector workers have it made like that?<br><br>I'll trade my 401K for a defined-benefit retirement any day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere .
" In reality government workers are generally better off than workers in the private sector .
They make nice salaries , are damned near impossible to fire , have defined-benefit retirement after a set number of years , and generally do less work than anyone in the private sector .
How many of you private sector workers have it made like that ? I 'll trade my 401K for a defined-benefit retirement any day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere.
"In reality government workers are generally better off than workers in the private sector.
They make nice salaries, are damned near impossible to fire, have defined-benefit retirement after a set number of years, and generally do less work than anyone in the private sector.
How many of you private sector workers have it made like that?I'll trade my 401K for a defined-benefit retirement any day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488111</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490395</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>nacturation</author>
	<datestamp>1246025820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should have made a censored version, only replacing every swear word with the word "walmart".  "Walmart off and die, motherwalmart!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should have made a censored version , only replacing every swear word with the word " walmart " .
" Walmart off and die , motherwalmart !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should have made a censored version, only replacing every swear word with the word "walmart".
"Walmart off and die, motherwalmart!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487587</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Fulcrum of Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1246007580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made. eighty. nine. fucking. percent.</p></div><p>Bullshit. If that were true, there would be no employers in NC.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without any kind of business expenses , I would be taxed 89 \ % on every dollar I made .
eighty. nine .
fucking. percent.Bullshit .
If that were true , there would be no employers in NC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made.
eighty. nine.
fucking. percent.Bullshit.
If that were true, there would be no employers in NC.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246009140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490317</id>
	<title>Re:They Had Warning</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1246025100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>James Barrett, how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax?</p></div><p>The tax would be applied to business affiliates operating within the State of North Carolina so it is probably not unconstitutional as long as the goods are not being shipped to somewhere outside of North Carolina which would make it an inter-state commerce issue and within the domain of the Federal Government. Now, the tax probably is a bad idea, especially during a recession, but that is another matter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>James Barrett , how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax ? The tax would be applied to business affiliates operating within the State of North Carolina so it is probably not unconstitutional as long as the goods are not being shipped to somewhere outside of North Carolina which would make it an inter-state commerce issue and within the domain of the Federal Government .
Now , the tax probably is a bad idea , especially during a recession , but that is another matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>James Barrett, how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax?The tax would be applied to business affiliates operating within the State of North Carolina so it is probably not unconstitutional as long as the goods are not being shipped to somewhere outside of North Carolina which would make it an inter-state commerce issue and within the domain of the Federal Government.
Now, the tax probably is a bad idea, especially during a recession, but that is another matter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488095</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246009920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't disagree with you,... but I wonder why you and I aren't running for office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't disagree with you,... but I wonder why you and I are n't running for office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't disagree with you,... but I wonder why you and I aren't running for office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490843</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>PingPongBoy</author>
	<datestamp>1246030680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Ultimately, I believe, they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors.</em></p><p>Hard to win - if the pay is bad, or there are no donors, then you get idiots or rich people with their own agendas who get voted in because no one else wants to even run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultimately , I believe , they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors.Hard to win - if the pay is bad , or there are no donors , then you get idiots or rich people with their own agendas who get voted in because no one else wants to even run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ultimately, I believe, they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors.Hard to win - if the pay is bad, or there are no donors, then you get idiots or rich people with their own agendas who get voted in because no one else wants to even run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28531499</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1246386600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><strong>That's assuming there is a God.  My argument is that everyone, even Jesus if he did exist was seeking out attention by performing magic tricks to convince people he was the son of God.  It's not exactly money, but it's fame, which in today's market money is a tool to achieve.By reading what you posted, it's the acquisition of more than you need to sustain.  By the argument that money is the root of all evil, you must be in a bad situation, working for money to pay for Internet access instead of farming your</strong></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's assuming there is a God .
My argument is that everyone , even Jesus if he did exist was seeking out attention by performing magic tricks to convince people he was the son of God .
It 's not exactly money , but it 's fame , which in today 's market money is a tool to achieve.By reading what you posted , it 's the acquisition of more than you need to sustain .
By the argument that money is the root of all evil , you must be in a bad situation , working for money to pay for Internet access instead of farming your</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's assuming there is a God.
My argument is that everyone, even Jesus if he did exist was seeking out attention by performing magic tricks to convince people he was the son of God.
It's not exactly money, but it's fame, which in today's market money is a tool to achieve.By reading what you posted, it's the acquisition of more than you need to sustain.
By the argument that money is the root of all evil, you must be in a bad situation, working for money to pay for Internet access instead of farming your</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489891</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246020840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Framers made it so that trade between states wasn't taxed.  And if you think about it, Amazon is really just a trading company, they just do their business over an invention that didn't exist in the Framers time.  The theory though is the same.  Walmart is a physical store and so gets taxed for that reason.  If they wanted to they could move purely online but they haven't done so, but its their right if they wanted to.<br> <br>

Oh wait, was I mistaken and it's your goal to increase taxation and the power of government, not decrease it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Framers made it so that trade between states was n't taxed .
And if you think about it , Amazon is really just a trading company , they just do their business over an invention that did n't exist in the Framers time .
The theory though is the same .
Walmart is a physical store and so gets taxed for that reason .
If they wanted to they could move purely online but they have n't done so , but its their right if they wanted to .
Oh wait , was I mistaken and it 's your goal to increase taxation and the power of government , not decrease it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Framers made it so that trade between states wasn't taxed.
And if you think about it, Amazon is really just a trading company, they just do their business over an invention that didn't exist in the Framers time.
The theory though is the same.
Walmart is a physical store and so gets taxed for that reason.
If they wanted to they could move purely online but they haven't done so, but its their right if they wanted to.
Oh wait, was I mistaken and it's your goal to increase taxation and the power of government, not decrease it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488549</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</id>
	<title>Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Amazon is acting like a typical "me first" corporation and ignoring its responsibility to the community.  What else is new?</p><p>The fact is, online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long.  They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they don't contribute to its upkeep.  Moreover, local businesses fairly, rightfully and morally pay their taxes and get undercut by unfair competition.</p><p>This isn't an issue of some ridiculous "internet freedom" entitlement.  This is about making sure that everyone shares the responsibility for keeping our society working.  Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Amazon is acting like a typical " me first " corporation and ignoring its responsibility to the community .
What else is new ? The fact is , online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long .
They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they do n't contribute to its upkeep .
Moreover , local businesses fairly , rightfully and morally pay their taxes and get undercut by unfair competition.This is n't an issue of some ridiculous " internet freedom " entitlement .
This is about making sure that everyone shares the responsibility for keeping our society working .
Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Amazon is acting like a typical "me first" corporation and ignoring its responsibility to the community.
What else is new?The fact is, online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long.
They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they don't contribute to its upkeep.
Moreover, local businesses fairly, rightfully and morally pay their taxes and get undercut by unfair competition.This isn't an issue of some ridiculous "internet freedom" entitlement.
This is about making sure that everyone shares the responsibility for keeping our society working.
Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're seeing more and more of this retaliation.</p><p>Green Day recently declined to make a censored version of their album to meet Wal*Mart's demands. Wal*Mart thought  that they could strong-arm anyone into making an non-explicit version. But lost out, because the album is doing quitewellthankyouverymuch.</p><p>On a more historical note, the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thing. As taxes became oppressive, the more reason there was for smuggling. They saw it as a great balancing factor. They state had to choose to keep the taxes low, or let a larger amount go untaxed, in addition to a drop in sales, like they are seeing with the new tobacco taxes.</p><p>The current government is advantaged because of electronic record keeping, where some SQL statement can spot discrepancies for additional investigation.</p><p>But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%. To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.</p><p>I applaud Amazon for having gravitas. I also wish the best for those affiliates in NC. Hopefully they will speak up and fix the taxation, or NC will learn to go without.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're seeing more and more of this retaliation.Green Day recently declined to make a censored version of their album to meet Wal * Mart 's demands .
Wal * Mart thought that they could strong-arm anyone into making an non-explicit version .
But lost out , because the album is doing quitewellthankyouverymuch.On a more historical note , the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thing .
As taxes became oppressive , the more reason there was for smuggling .
They saw it as a great balancing factor .
They state had to choose to keep the taxes low , or let a larger amount go untaxed , in addition to a drop in sales , like they are seeing with the new tobacco taxes.The current government is advantaged because of electronic record keeping , where some SQL statement can spot discrepancies for additional investigation.But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20 \ % .
To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity , or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.I applaud Amazon for having gravitas .
I also wish the best for those affiliates in NC .
Hopefully they will speak up and fix the taxation , or NC will learn to go without .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're seeing more and more of this retaliation.Green Day recently declined to make a censored version of their album to meet Wal*Mart's demands.
Wal*Mart thought  that they could strong-arm anyone into making an non-explicit version.
But lost out, because the album is doing quitewellthankyouverymuch.On a more historical note, the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thing.
As taxes became oppressive, the more reason there was for smuggling.
They saw it as a great balancing factor.
They state had to choose to keep the taxes low, or let a larger amount go untaxed, in addition to a drop in sales, like they are seeing with the new tobacco taxes.The current government is advantaged because of electronic record keeping, where some SQL statement can spot discrepancies for additional investigation.But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%.
To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.I applaud Amazon for having gravitas.
I also wish the best for those affiliates in NC.
Hopefully they will speak up and fix the taxation, or NC will learn to go without.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1246047660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Balkanization of commerce isn't a good thing.</p><p>Amazon pays its taxes. Get Amazon to head quarter in your community and then you'll get its tax money.</p><p>The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level (and keeping up to date) would be overwhelming. The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that's what Amazon did.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Balkanization of commerce is n't a good thing.Amazon pays its taxes .
Get Amazon to head quarter in your community and then you 'll get its tax money.The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level ( and keeping up to date ) would be overwhelming .
The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that 's what Amazon did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Balkanization of commerce isn't a good thing.Amazon pays its taxes.
Get Amazon to head quarter in your community and then you'll get its tax money.The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level (and keeping up to date) would be overwhelming.
The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that's what Amazon did.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490997</id>
	<title>We have an asshole for a Governor in this state.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246032540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>She follows a previous asshole, Mike Sleazly.   She is destroying North Carolina.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>She follows a previous asshole , Mike Sleazly .
She is destroying North Carolina .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She follows a previous asshole, Mike Sleazly.
She is destroying North Carolina.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486613</id>
	<title>Finally somebody who stand up against more taxes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This country is going down the drain with the burden of all these taxes.</p><p>How will we end up competing with other nations when it is so hostile to have your business in this country?</p><p>How are we going to motivate people to make money, when all they see is more taxes, who work the extra day or the extra hour when you know the progressive tax systems will penalize you for doing it.</p><p>"Taxes only pays for governmental bureaucracy that collects the tax, and provides little or nothing to the poor." - Dr. Mohammad Yunus</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This country is going down the drain with the burden of all these taxes.How will we end up competing with other nations when it is so hostile to have your business in this country ? How are we going to motivate people to make money , when all they see is more taxes , who work the extra day or the extra hour when you know the progressive tax systems will penalize you for doing it .
" Taxes only pays for governmental bureaucracy that collects the tax , and provides little or nothing to the poor .
" - Dr. Mohammad Yunus</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This country is going down the drain with the burden of all these taxes.How will we end up competing with other nations when it is so hostile to have your business in this country?How are we going to motivate people to make money, when all they see is more taxes, who work the extra day or the extra hour when you know the progressive tax systems will penalize you for doing it.
"Taxes only pays for governmental bureaucracy that collects the tax, and provides little or nothing to the poor.
" - Dr. Mohammad Yunus</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495739</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>TheoMurpse</author>
	<datestamp>1246126020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You would also need to know exactly where each IP terminates. Is A.B.C.D within city limits? Etc.</p><p>Let's not kid ourselves: Tax rates aren't determined by where the stuff is shipped to; it is determined by where the payment transaction occurs. If I pay for something in NYC and have it shipped to Seattle, I pay NYC tax, not Seattle tax.</p><p>Hence, looking at the IP (and not the shipping address or billing address for the credit card) is necessary.</p><p>But, you see, we don't actually have databases for where each IP goes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would also need to know exactly where each IP terminates .
Is A.B.C.D within city limits ?
Etc.Let 's not kid ourselves : Tax rates are n't determined by where the stuff is shipped to ; it is determined by where the payment transaction occurs .
If I pay for something in NYC and have it shipped to Seattle , I pay NYC tax , not Seattle tax.Hence , looking at the IP ( and not the shipping address or billing address for the credit card ) is necessary.But , you see , we do n't actually have databases for where each IP goes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You would also need to know exactly where each IP terminates.
Is A.B.C.D within city limits?
Etc.Let's not kid ourselves: Tax rates aren't determined by where the stuff is shipped to; it is determined by where the payment transaction occurs.
If I pay for something in NYC and have it shipped to Seattle, I pay NYC tax, not Seattle tax.Hence, looking at the IP (and not the shipping address or billing address for the credit card) is necessary.But, you see, we don't actually have databases for where each IP goes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490623</id>
	<title>North Taxalina</title>
	<author>Wansu</author>
	<datestamp>1246027980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems our lawmakers are hell bent to outdo Taxachussetts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems our lawmakers are hell bent to outdo Taxachussetts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems our lawmakers are hell bent to outdo Taxachussetts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487513</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Pollardito</author>
	<datestamp>1246007280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This isn't even new with the internet.  Catalog sales are also only taxed if the seller has a presence in the state of the buyer.  That's irrelevant to catalog sales for a company like Sears who has a presence most everywhere, but other regional companies have been selling nationwide via catalog and charging no taxes for decades.  If they want to fix this I'm not sure they can do it on a state-by-state level, it'd seem to require some sort of a federal measure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't even new with the internet .
Catalog sales are also only taxed if the seller has a presence in the state of the buyer .
That 's irrelevant to catalog sales for a company like Sears who has a presence most everywhere , but other regional companies have been selling nationwide via catalog and charging no taxes for decades .
If they want to fix this I 'm not sure they can do it on a state-by-state level , it 'd seem to require some sort of a federal measure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't even new with the internet.
Catalog sales are also only taxed if the seller has a presence in the state of the buyer.
That's irrelevant to catalog sales for a company like Sears who has a presence most everywhere, but other regional companies have been selling nationwide via catalog and charging no taxes for decades.
If they want to fix this I'm not sure they can do it on a state-by-state level, it'd seem to require some sort of a federal measure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488673</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1246012560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.</p></div><p>Some times you have to. And when people get pissed and make their displeasure known to the pols changes get made. See, when they feel the heat they see the light.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.Some times you have to .
And when people get pissed and make their displeasure known to the pols changes get made .
See , when they feel the heat they see the light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.Some times you have to.
And when people get pissed and make their displeasure known to the pols changes get made.
See, when they feel the heat they see the light.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1246047240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of "income &amp; property tax revenues".  If these people needed a hint to avoid New Jersey, your post certainly provided it.  Of course, they could have looked around to find that <a href="http://www.heartland.org/publications/budget\%20tax/article/24132/New\_Jersey\_Has\_Nations\_Worst\_Business\_Tax\_Climate.html" title="heartland.org">New Jersey has the worst business climate of any state in the US</a> [heartland.org].</p><p>My state (Minnesota) isn't very good either, but it beats New Jersey.  I hope to move to an even better state soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of " income &amp; property tax revenues " .
If these people needed a hint to avoid New Jersey , your post certainly provided it .
Of course , they could have looked around to find that New Jersey has the worst business climate of any state in the US [ heartland.org ] .My state ( Minnesota ) is n't very good either , but it beats New Jersey .
I hope to move to an even better state soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just think how much nicer NJ would be if people were valued for their humanity rather than just as sources of "income &amp; property tax revenues".
If these people needed a hint to avoid New Jersey, your post certainly provided it.
Of course, they could have looked around to find that New Jersey has the worst business climate of any state in the US [heartland.org].My state (Minnesota) isn't very good either, but it beats New Jersey.
I hope to move to an even better state soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486627</id>
	<title>It's not tacky</title>
	<author>rpillala</author>
	<datestamp>1246046760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's exactly the way to use people who are referring business to your business.  The only thing that motivates a business "relationship" is the exchange of value.  If the proposed law was going to cause this change anyway, making it early as an example is the way to get people to "call down to Raleigh."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.That 's exactly the way to use people who are referring business to your business .
The only thing that motivates a business " relationship " is the exchange of value .
If the proposed law was going to cause this change anyway , making it early as an example is the way to get people to " call down to Raleigh .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.That's exactly the way to use people who are referring business to your business.
The only thing that motivates a business "relationship" is the exchange of value.
If the proposed law was going to cause this change anyway, making it early as an example is the way to get people to "call down to Raleigh.
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488507</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Stradivarius</author>
	<datestamp>1246011540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree.  Amazon is looking out for their customers in the state (which BTW are the same people as "the community").  Of course this benefits Amazon as well, but they are not the only beneficiary.</p><p>Second of all... online retailers are not leeching off anyone via tax evasion. They have followed the law and paid the taxes that they are legally obligated to pay.  That's called "complying with the law", not "tax evasion".  There is no requirement, moral or otherwise, that anyone pay more than the law says you have to.</p><p>Third.... Many states exempt basic groceries from sales taxes, in part to help the less fortunate afford to eat.  The government's decision to do so does not turn your local grocery store into a "leech".  They're a business providing value to the community (few people want a community without a decent grocery store).  Similarly, regardless of how the NC Legislature decides to raise money, Amazon is a business providing value to their customers (easier search and wider selection than a brick-and-mortar store).</p><p>But this isn't even about taxing NC residents' purchases.  The fairness argument you make about local versus online businesses is about whether or not to tax NC resident's online purchases.  But the article indicates that the Legislature is attempting more than that.  It's trying to tax a transaction between customers and businesses <b>who are both outside the state</b>, simply because a NC resident referred those customers to the businesses.  That's just the Legislature getting greedy (if they wanted to tax the referral fee itself, they could, and in fact do via the income tax... but they're trying to tax a sales transaction which itself is operating completely outside the state).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
Amazon is looking out for their customers in the state ( which BTW are the same people as " the community " ) .
Of course this benefits Amazon as well , but they are not the only beneficiary.Second of all... online retailers are not leeching off anyone via tax evasion .
They have followed the law and paid the taxes that they are legally obligated to pay .
That 's called " complying with the law " , not " tax evasion " .
There is no requirement , moral or otherwise , that anyone pay more than the law says you have to.Third.... Many states exempt basic groceries from sales taxes , in part to help the less fortunate afford to eat .
The government 's decision to do so does not turn your local grocery store into a " leech " .
They 're a business providing value to the community ( few people want a community without a decent grocery store ) .
Similarly , regardless of how the NC Legislature decides to raise money , Amazon is a business providing value to their customers ( easier search and wider selection than a brick-and-mortar store ) .But this is n't even about taxing NC residents ' purchases .
The fairness argument you make about local versus online businesses is about whether or not to tax NC resident 's online purchases .
But the article indicates that the Legislature is attempting more than that .
It 's trying to tax a transaction between customers and businesses who are both outside the state , simply because a NC resident referred those customers to the businesses .
That 's just the Legislature getting greedy ( if they wanted to tax the referral fee itself , they could , and in fact do via the income tax... but they 're trying to tax a sales transaction which itself is operating completely outside the state ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
Amazon is looking out for their customers in the state (which BTW are the same people as "the community").
Of course this benefits Amazon as well, but they are not the only beneficiary.Second of all... online retailers are not leeching off anyone via tax evasion.
They have followed the law and paid the taxes that they are legally obligated to pay.
That's called "complying with the law", not "tax evasion".
There is no requirement, moral or otherwise, that anyone pay more than the law says you have to.Third.... Many states exempt basic groceries from sales taxes, in part to help the less fortunate afford to eat.
The government's decision to do so does not turn your local grocery store into a "leech".
They're a business providing value to the community (few people want a community without a decent grocery store).
Similarly, regardless of how the NC Legislature decides to raise money, Amazon is a business providing value to their customers (easier search and wider selection than a brick-and-mortar store).But this isn't even about taxing NC residents' purchases.
The fairness argument you make about local versus online businesses is about whether or not to tax NC resident's online purchases.
But the article indicates that the Legislature is attempting more than that.
It's trying to tax a transaction between customers and businesses who are both outside the state, simply because a NC resident referred those customers to the businesses.
That's just the Legislature getting greedy (if they wanted to tax the referral fee itself, they could, and in fact do via the income tax... but they're trying to tax a sales transaction which itself is operating completely outside the state).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490535</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>Peter La Casse</author>
	<datestamp>1246027080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What is the state to do?</p></div></blockquote><p>Minimize the impact of fluctuations in revenue by minimizing government services and expenditures.

</p><p>Solve the problem of bureaucracy ("the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy") and apply the fix to every state and local government.

</p><p>The state should be fiscally prudent so that it is able to borrow money to make it through temporary tough times.  Then, since it is fiscally prudent, it will be able to pay that debt off during good times.

</p><p>Obviously no state government is going to do those things, but that's a better arrangement than what we have now (spending higher than revenues all the time.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the state to do ? Minimize the impact of fluctuations in revenue by minimizing government services and expenditures .
Solve the problem of bureaucracy ( " the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy " ) and apply the fix to every state and local government .
The state should be fiscally prudent so that it is able to borrow money to make it through temporary tough times .
Then , since it is fiscally prudent , it will be able to pay that debt off during good times .
Obviously no state government is going to do those things , but that 's a better arrangement than what we have now ( spending higher than revenues all the time .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the state to do?Minimize the impact of fluctuations in revenue by minimizing government services and expenditures.
Solve the problem of bureaucracy ("the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy") and apply the fix to every state and local government.
The state should be fiscally prudent so that it is able to borrow money to make it through temporary tough times.
Then, since it is fiscally prudent, it will be able to pay that debt off during good times.
Obviously no state government is going to do those things, but that's a better arrangement than what we have now (spending higher than revenues all the time.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487677</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>NineNine</author>
	<datestamp>1246007880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country."</p><p>As an online AND brick and mortar retailer, I can imagine.  It would be DIFFICULT!  I mean, you'd have to have some sort of computer program that accessed a table, geez, maybe HUNDREDS of records large, and then report to the business owners where to pay the tax to!  I mean, it would take a good, 5-10 minutes for somebody to program, and it would have to be updated every few months.  Whoa!  Talk about an inconvenience.<br>That's a LOT more difficult than trying to run a brick-and-mortar store that pays significant amounts of taxes and having to compete against businesses that don't have to collect sales tax from their customers.</p><p>Please not this entire post was tongue in cheek.  Except for this line.  Oh, and the quote I was responding too... that was literal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country .
" As an online AND brick and mortar retailer , I can imagine .
It would be DIFFICULT !
I mean , you 'd have to have some sort of computer program that accessed a table , geez , maybe HUNDREDS of records large , and then report to the business owners where to pay the tax to !
I mean , it would take a good , 5-10 minutes for somebody to program , and it would have to be updated every few months .
Whoa ! Talk about an inconvenience.That 's a LOT more difficult than trying to run a brick-and-mortar store that pays significant amounts of taxes and having to compete against businesses that do n't have to collect sales tax from their customers.Please not this entire post was tongue in cheek .
Except for this line .
Oh , and the quote I was responding too... that was literal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.
"As an online AND brick and mortar retailer, I can imagine.
It would be DIFFICULT!
I mean, you'd have to have some sort of computer program that accessed a table, geez, maybe HUNDREDS of records large, and then report to the business owners where to pay the tax to!
I mean, it would take a good, 5-10 minutes for somebody to program, and it would have to be updated every few months.
Whoa!  Talk about an inconvenience.That's a LOT more difficult than trying to run a brick-and-mortar store that pays significant amounts of taxes and having to compete against businesses that don't have to collect sales tax from their customers.Please not this entire post was tongue in cheek.
Except for this line.
Oh, and the quote I was responding too... that was literal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488589</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246012140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What message is that?</p><blockquote><div><p>If you don't let us get by without paying taxes we're going to take our toys and go home!</p></div></blockquote><p>Is that the message you're referring to?</p><p>Amazon doesn't have the guts to stop selling to NC itself, that would cost them too much money, they just want to hurt the little guys.  You know, the affiliates they use as cannon fodder on a regular basis?</p><p>Hopefully NC will amend the law to require anyone shipping a product into the state to collect sales tax on the sale and distributed it to the state.  Of course Amazon will pull their typically big bully bullshit and point out their lack of presence in NC.  But this will just go to serve the point, Amazon is just throwing their weight around.</p><p>Why should they get out of paying taxes for business done in the state, yet Walmart has to?</p><p>The state is supposed to make the companies that employee people in its state and provide the money that Amazon is taking, but let Amazon not contribute anything back?</p><p>It doesn't take a math major to figure out if you are sucking all the money out of an area and not putting anything back that it won't last forever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What message is that ? If you do n't let us get by without paying taxes we 're going to take our toys and go home ! Is that the message you 're referring to ? Amazon does n't have the guts to stop selling to NC itself , that would cost them too much money , they just want to hurt the little guys .
You know , the affiliates they use as cannon fodder on a regular basis ? Hopefully NC will amend the law to require anyone shipping a product into the state to collect sales tax on the sale and distributed it to the state .
Of course Amazon will pull their typically big bully bullshit and point out their lack of presence in NC .
But this will just go to serve the point , Amazon is just throwing their weight around.Why should they get out of paying taxes for business done in the state , yet Walmart has to ? The state is supposed to make the companies that employee people in its state and provide the money that Amazon is taking , but let Amazon not contribute anything back ? It does n't take a math major to figure out if you are sucking all the money out of an area and not putting anything back that it wo n't last forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What message is that?If you don't let us get by without paying taxes we're going to take our toys and go home!Is that the message you're referring to?Amazon doesn't have the guts to stop selling to NC itself, that would cost them too much money, they just want to hurt the little guys.
You know, the affiliates they use as cannon fodder on a regular basis?Hopefully NC will amend the law to require anyone shipping a product into the state to collect sales tax on the sale and distributed it to the state.
Of course Amazon will pull their typically big bully bullshit and point out their lack of presence in NC.
But this will just go to serve the point, Amazon is just throwing their weight around.Why should they get out of paying taxes for business done in the state, yet Walmart has to?The state is supposed to make the companies that employee people in its state and provide the money that Amazon is taking, but let Amazon not contribute anything back?It doesn't take a math major to figure out if you are sucking all the money out of an area and not putting anything back that it won't last forever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488467</id>
	<title>Re:Bravo North Carolina.</title>
	<author>nschubach</author>
	<datestamp>1246011360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but if another state can provide what they need without as many taxes, then they've just competed for business.  If South Carolina can provide roads, education, and arts facilities cheaper than North Carolina... that's competition.  Amazon looked at the taxes they'd have to pay and they realized it wasn't a smart business decision to stay.</p><p>It's all a matter of abstraction.  Directly they may have no effect on selecting a location of business, but the actions of the state indirectly affect tax rates and infrastructure costs.  If a state is paying more for health care than another state and passing that off to the corporations, the corporations have all the right to not do business there.  The people in that state may be getting good health care, but they will be paying more for goods purchased now because any company willing to put up with higher taxes is going to pass that along to the customer.  Ergo, taxes = competition for good businesses.</p><p>With the internet as competition, they will soon find that they need to reduce those taxes or risk losing citizens who are fed up paying more because of the state they live in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but if another state can provide what they need without as many taxes , then they 've just competed for business .
If South Carolina can provide roads , education , and arts facilities cheaper than North Carolina... that 's competition .
Amazon looked at the taxes they 'd have to pay and they realized it was n't a smart business decision to stay.It 's all a matter of abstraction .
Directly they may have no effect on selecting a location of business , but the actions of the state indirectly affect tax rates and infrastructure costs .
If a state is paying more for health care than another state and passing that off to the corporations , the corporations have all the right to not do business there .
The people in that state may be getting good health care , but they will be paying more for goods purchased now because any company willing to put up with higher taxes is going to pass that along to the customer .
Ergo , taxes = competition for good businesses.With the internet as competition , they will soon find that they need to reduce those taxes or risk losing citizens who are fed up paying more because of the state they live in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but if another state can provide what they need without as many taxes, then they've just competed for business.
If South Carolina can provide roads, education, and arts facilities cheaper than North Carolina... that's competition.
Amazon looked at the taxes they'd have to pay and they realized it wasn't a smart business decision to stay.It's all a matter of abstraction.
Directly they may have no effect on selecting a location of business, but the actions of the state indirectly affect tax rates and infrastructure costs.
If a state is paying more for health care than another state and passing that off to the corporations, the corporations have all the right to not do business there.
The people in that state may be getting good health care, but they will be paying more for goods purchased now because any company willing to put up with higher taxes is going to pass that along to the customer.
Ergo, taxes = competition for good businesses.With the internet as competition, they will soon find that they need to reduce those taxes or risk losing citizens who are fed up paying more because of the state they live in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487385</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>lewp</author>
	<datestamp>1246049940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. Amazon is losing sales on this too, so it's not like they're just screwing the little guy. They're putting their money where their mouth is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Amazon is losing sales on this too , so it 's not like they 're just screwing the little guy .
They 're putting their money where their mouth is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Amazon is losing sales on this too, so it's not like they're just screwing the little guy.
They're putting their money where their mouth is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487585</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1246007580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for my TV knowing that people who can't afford TVs didn't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper.</p></div><p>Communist.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I 'd rather pay 7 \ % for my TV knowing that people who ca n't afford TVs did n't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper.Communist .
: p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for my TV knowing that people who can't afford TVs didn't have to shell out more to feed their kids so that my TV could be cheaper.Communist.
:p
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487217</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>ciggieposeur</author>
	<datestamp>1246049400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address?</i></p><p>Wouldn't it be the computer's address rather than the customer's address?</p><p>If I go to the town next door and buy coffee, I pay 1\% extra sales tax.  Why can't people over there come to my house and use my computer (with their account) and get a lower sales tax rate?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address ? Would n't it be the computer 's address rather than the customer 's address ? If I go to the town next door and buy coffee , I pay 1 \ % extra sales tax .
Why ca n't people over there come to my house and use my computer ( with their account ) and get a lower sales tax rate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address?Wouldn't it be the computer's address rather than the customer's address?If I go to the town next door and buy coffee, I pay 1\% extra sales tax.
Why can't people over there come to my house and use my computer (with their account) and get a lower sales tax rate?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486707</id>
	<title>Global warming is a hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html" title="wsj.com" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html</a> [wsj.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html [ wsj.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html [wsj.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487389</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246006800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The fact is, online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long. They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they don't contribute to its upkeep."</p><p>What infrastructure is Washington based Amazon using in North Carolina?</p><p>That's the rub. They aren't.</p><p>That is the whole point behind "No Nexus = no tax"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The fact is , online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long .
They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they do n't contribute to its upkeep .
" What infrastructure is Washington based Amazon using in North Carolina ? That 's the rub .
They are n't.That is the whole point behind " No Nexus = no tax "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The fact is, online retailers have been leeching off communities for far too long.
They make use of the infrastructure these communities provide but use tax evasion to make sure they don't contribute to its upkeep.
"What infrastructure is Washington based Amazon using in North Carolina?That's the rub.
They aren't.That is the whole point behind "No Nexus = no tax"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>LordKaT</author>
	<datestamp>1246047960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, because it's not bad enough that the affiliates in North Carolina are already taxed on their earnings, but now they have to be taxed on the sales they refer to Amazon? You're talking taxing the same people three times on every sale (Local, State, and Affiliate). Let's not mention the bigger affiliates that are taxed 5 times (2x corporate earnings taxes, IRS personal, State personal, Affiliate)</p><p>Oh, and yes, the IRS and states tax the shit out of individuals in business. I don't know where people get the idea of mystical business tax relief, because if you're in business and playing by the law, you don't get a refund check, you send in a damn check every fiscal quarter.</p><p>Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made. eighty. nine. fucking. percent. And I'm just barely hovering around the poverty line doing this shit. Then you and your backwards populist shitheads yell at me for not spending money to better myself on college, or buying a car, or some other bullshit.</p><p>If your community is in such a dire condition that they absolutely need to tax a person a third time on the same dollar, then your community is completely fucked, needs to be dissolved, have its assets liquidated, and a new structure put in place.</p><p>In short: go fuck yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , because it 's not bad enough that the affiliates in North Carolina are already taxed on their earnings , but now they have to be taxed on the sales they refer to Amazon ?
You 're talking taxing the same people three times on every sale ( Local , State , and Affiliate ) .
Let 's not mention the bigger affiliates that are taxed 5 times ( 2x corporate earnings taxes , IRS personal , State personal , Affiliate ) Oh , and yes , the IRS and states tax the shit out of individuals in business .
I do n't know where people get the idea of mystical business tax relief , because if you 're in business and playing by the law , you do n't get a refund check , you send in a damn check every fiscal quarter.Without any kind of business expenses , I would be taxed 89 \ % on every dollar I made .
eighty. nine .
fucking. percent .
And I 'm just barely hovering around the poverty line doing this shit .
Then you and your backwards populist shitheads yell at me for not spending money to better myself on college , or buying a car , or some other bullshit.If your community is in such a dire condition that they absolutely need to tax a person a third time on the same dollar , then your community is completely fucked , needs to be dissolved , have its assets liquidated , and a new structure put in place.In short : go fuck yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, because it's not bad enough that the affiliates in North Carolina are already taxed on their earnings, but now they have to be taxed on the sales they refer to Amazon?
You're talking taxing the same people three times on every sale (Local, State, and Affiliate).
Let's not mention the bigger affiliates that are taxed 5 times (2x corporate earnings taxes, IRS personal, State personal, Affiliate)Oh, and yes, the IRS and states tax the shit out of individuals in business.
I don't know where people get the idea of mystical business tax relief, because if you're in business and playing by the law, you don't get a refund check, you send in a damn check every fiscal quarter.Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made.
eighty. nine.
fucking. percent.
And I'm just barely hovering around the poverty line doing this shit.
Then you and your backwards populist shitheads yell at me for not spending money to better myself on college, or buying a car, or some other bullshit.If your community is in such a dire condition that they absolutely need to tax a person a third time on the same dollar, then your community is completely fucked, needs to be dissolved, have its assets liquidated, and a new structure put in place.In short: go fuck yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491105</id>
	<title>Hawaii too</title>
	<author>tedwouldgo</author>
	<datestamp>1246034040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just got an email that said Amazon was cutting off Hawaii affiliates for the same reason. It seems like they are going to destroy their entire affiliate base. Maybe it's just not worth it any more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just got an email that said Amazon was cutting off Hawaii affiliates for the same reason .
It seems like they are going to destroy their entire affiliate base .
Maybe it 's just not worth it any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just got an email that said Amazon was cutting off Hawaii affiliates for the same reason.
It seems like they are going to destroy their entire affiliate base.
Maybe it's just not worth it any more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495725</id>
	<title>Re:Bravo North Carolina.</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246125840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods, is there a well-educated workforce, is there a thriving arts culture (yes, smart businesses look for this!).</p></div><p>That's all well and good for a high-tech manufacturer.  For the other 99.99\% of employers, tax rates are critical decision items.  If opening a plant in one state instead of its neighbor means an automatic 5\% drop in overhead, the cheaper state will win every time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods , is there a well-educated workforce , is there a thriving arts culture ( yes , smart businesses look for this !
) .That 's all well and good for a high-tech manufacturer .
For the other 99.99 \ % of employers , tax rates are critical decision items .
If opening a plant in one state instead of its neighbor means an automatic 5 \ % drop in overhead , the cheaper state will win every time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods, is there a well-educated workforce, is there a thriving arts culture (yes, smart businesses look for this!
).That's all well and good for a high-tech manufacturer.
For the other 99.99\% of employers, tax rates are critical decision items.
If opening a plant in one state instead of its neighbor means an automatic 5\% drop in overhead, the cheaper state will win every time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487423</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246006860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sales taxes is not what makes NJ a hostile business environment.  NJ corporate income tax structure and (almost deliberately) low-tech regulatory agencies (in one of the most high-tech states in the nation) is what makes it hostile to the business environment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sales taxes is not what makes NJ a hostile business environment .
NJ corporate income tax structure and ( almost deliberately ) low-tech regulatory agencies ( in one of the most high-tech states in the nation ) is what makes it hostile to the business environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sales taxes is not what makes NJ a hostile business environment.
NJ corporate income tax structure and (almost deliberately) low-tech regulatory agencies (in one of the most high-tech states in the nation) is what makes it hostile to the business environment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486751</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this any different than mail order or phone order businesses?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this any different than mail order or phone order businesses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this any different than mail order or phone order businesses?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</id>
	<title>That's the real meaning of "voting with your feet"</title>
	<author>vivaoporto</author>
	<datestamp>1246046160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the real meaning of "voting with your feet". There is an unjust law, or even a just one that Amazon doesn't agree, and they don't want to be subjected to it, so they move out of the state.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the real meaning of " voting with your feet " .
There is an unjust law , or even a just one that Amazon does n't agree , and they do n't want to be subjected to it , so they move out of the state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the real meaning of "voting with your feet".
There is an unjust law, or even a just one that Amazon doesn't agree, and they don't want to be subjected to it, so they move out of the state.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175</id>
	<title>Re:Bravo North Carolina.</title>
	<author>David Greene</author>
	<datestamp>1246049280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Taxes are how states compete for business.</p></div><p>That's a very twisted view of taxation and its purpose.  States/cities/counties/etc. don't complete based on tax rates.  Studies have demonstrated that over and over.  The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods, is there a well-educated workforce, is there a thriving arts culture (yes, smart businesses look for this!).</p><p>And guess what?  A state provides none of this without taxes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taxes are how states compete for business.That 's a very twisted view of taxation and its purpose .
States/cities/counties/etc. do n't complete based on tax rates .
Studies have demonstrated that over and over .
The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods , is there a well-educated workforce , is there a thriving arts culture ( yes , smart businesses look for this !
) .And guess what ?
A state provides none of this without taxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taxes are how states compete for business.That's a very twisted view of taxation and its purpose.
States/cities/counties/etc. don't complete based on tax rates.
Studies have demonstrated that over and over.
The competition is based on infrastructure and quality of life -- is there adequate transportation for employees and goods, is there a well-educated workforce, is there a thriving arts culture (yes, smart businesses look for this!
).And guess what?
A state provides none of this without taxes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487803</id>
	<title>Re:not tacky</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246008480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, essentially putting your affiliates out of business because you're unwilling to pay higher taxes.  Excellent way to win your affiliates' hearts and minds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , essentially putting your affiliates out of business because you 're unwilling to pay higher taxes .
Excellent way to win your affiliates ' hearts and minds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, essentially putting your affiliates out of business because you're unwilling to pay higher taxes.
Excellent way to win your affiliates' hearts and minds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488949</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1246014060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%. To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.</p></div><p>Without knowing the specifics of NC's budget, I'd say you're underestimating how inefficient the process is.  Think of a big huge titanic-like ship, it can't turn on a dime.  The government does have a reason to introduce new taxes when the economy bottoms out, if only because they tend to overspend when the economy is bad, and much moreso when it's good.  The economy dropped quickly compared to their reaction time, as it always has and always will.  They didn't learn from history as they never have and never will.  Existing revenue undoubtedly dropped with the economy, but the programs they've set up obviously don't.</p><p>It's not an efficient process, but I'd argue they should find ways of transitioning rather than just "Hey free downtown health clinic, the economy tanked yesterday, and so we're not going to get as much taxes, so we can't fund you.  Go home.  Dude with the stab wound, get out of here.  Now."  Or "repaving of this highway postponed indefinitely because of the economy.  Continue taking the 20 mile detour to work everyday until either the economy picks up again or you lose your job, whichever comes first."</p><p>You want these programs to be let down gently if they have to go in other words, and that takes tax money the government suddenly doesn't have.</p><p>It could also be solved with foresight, careful planning, innovation, and sacrifice, but we don't live in a world where legislators or politicians have those qualities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20 \ % .
To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity , or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.Without knowing the specifics of NC 's budget , I 'd say you 're underestimating how inefficient the process is .
Think of a big huge titanic-like ship , it ca n't turn on a dime .
The government does have a reason to introduce new taxes when the economy bottoms out , if only because they tend to overspend when the economy is bad , and much moreso when it 's good .
The economy dropped quickly compared to their reaction time , as it always has and always will .
They did n't learn from history as they never have and never will .
Existing revenue undoubtedly dropped with the economy , but the programs they 've set up obviously do n't.It 's not an efficient process , but I 'd argue they should find ways of transitioning rather than just " Hey free downtown health clinic , the economy tanked yesterday , and so we 're not going to get as much taxes , so we ca n't fund you .
Go home .
Dude with the stab wound , get out of here .
Now. " Or " repaving of this highway postponed indefinitely because of the economy .
Continue taking the 20 mile detour to work everyday until either the economy picks up again or you lose your job , whichever comes first .
" You want these programs to be let down gently if they have to go in other words , and that takes tax money the government suddenly does n't have.It could also be solved with foresight , careful planning , innovation , and sacrifice , but we do n't live in a world where legislators or politicians have those qualities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%.
To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.Without knowing the specifics of NC's budget, I'd say you're underestimating how inefficient the process is.
Think of a big huge titanic-like ship, it can't turn on a dime.
The government does have a reason to introduce new taxes when the economy bottoms out, if only because they tend to overspend when the economy is bad, and much moreso when it's good.
The economy dropped quickly compared to their reaction time, as it always has and always will.
They didn't learn from history as they never have and never will.
Existing revenue undoubtedly dropped with the economy, but the programs they've set up obviously don't.It's not an efficient process, but I'd argue they should find ways of transitioning rather than just "Hey free downtown health clinic, the economy tanked yesterday, and so we're not going to get as much taxes, so we can't fund you.
Go home.
Dude with the stab wound, get out of here.
Now."  Or "repaving of this highway postponed indefinitely because of the economy.
Continue taking the 20 mile detour to work everyday until either the economy picks up again or you lose your job, whichever comes first.
"You want these programs to be let down gently if they have to go in other words, and that takes tax money the government suddenly doesn't have.It could also be solved with foresight, careful planning, innovation, and sacrifice, but we don't live in a world where legislators or politicians have those qualities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649</id>
	<title>While your at it......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get them to reverse the public smoking ban they just nazi'd through.......</p><p>As a small restaurant owner, I have the right to decide if the use of a COMPLETELY LEGAL substance such as tobacco hurts or helps me bring people through the door to keep my employees and bills paid.</p><p>I wish I could shove the horse you rode in on straight up your southern expressway with your opinionated legislation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get them to reverse the public smoking ban they just nazi 'd through.......As a small restaurant owner , I have the right to decide if the use of a COMPLETELY LEGAL substance such as tobacco hurts or helps me bring people through the door to keep my employees and bills paid.I wish I could shove the horse you rode in on straight up your southern expressway with your opinionated legislation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get them to reverse the public smoking ban they just nazi'd through.......As a small restaurant owner, I have the right to decide if the use of a COMPLETELY LEGAL substance such as tobacco hurts or helps me bring people through the door to keep my employees and bills paid.I wish I could shove the horse you rode in on straight up your southern expressway with your opinionated legislation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486685</id>
	<title>"Cuts of" or Cuts off"?</title>
	<author>gemtech</author>
	<datestamp>1246047000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would somebody make up their mind?  Off-topic slams welcome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would somebody make up their mind ?
Off-topic slams welcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would somebody make up their mind?
Off-topic slams welcome.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494341</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1246114200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.</p></div><p>Provide less services.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Its not like they don't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.</p></div><p>They will have less customers if they have to charge sales tax. I know I go looking for another etailer if there's a sales tax charge, just to see if I can save a dollar or two.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>So when your state ends up with no instate businesses, so theres no more sales tax, and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis, then what? When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... now what?</p></div><p>Hallelujah! I don't know about anywhere in NC, but in my area the government is involved in way too much, and should fuck off immediately.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are, but you're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right.</p></div><p>All I care about is 9-1-1, and then really only for fire. The police can't come in time to help you when you REALLY need help, anyway; I already have all the help I can use right here *pat pat*</p><p>For example, the roads where I live (Lake County, CA) are a complete scam; they've been "maintained" by the same group of companies for years now, and every time they work on the roads they get lumpier, no joke. The biggest intersection in Lakeport, CA might as well be made out of speed bumps. It's a <em>Freeway Intersection</em>. Pathetic.</p><p>And let's talk about one of the most common examples: The school system is not a system of education but one of indoctrination; I actually consider public school child abuse and object to being charged for it.</p><p>I would like to see a lot less services "provided". For instance, it could be argued that building permits are unconstitutional.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.Provide less services.Its not like they do n't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.They will have less customers if they have to charge sales tax .
I know I go looking for another etailer if there 's a sales tax charge , just to see if I can save a dollar or two.So when your state ends up with no instate businesses , so theres no more sales tax , and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis , then what ?
When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize ... now what ? Hallelujah !
I do n't know about anywhere in NC , but in my area the government is involved in way too much , and should fuck off immediately.Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are , but you 're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right.All I care about is 9-1-1 , and then really only for fire .
The police ca n't come in time to help you when you REALLY need help , anyway ; I already have all the help I can use right here * pat pat * For example , the roads where I live ( Lake County , CA ) are a complete scam ; they 've been " maintained " by the same group of companies for years now , and every time they work on the roads they get lumpier , no joke .
The biggest intersection in Lakeport , CA might as well be made out of speed bumps .
It 's a Freeway Intersection .
Pathetic.And let 's talk about one of the most common examples : The school system is not a system of education but one of indoctrination ; I actually consider public school child abuse and object to being charged for it.I would like to see a lot less services " provided " .
For instance , it could be argued that building permits are unconstitutional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.Provide less services.Its not like they don't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.They will have less customers if they have to charge sales tax.
I know I go looking for another etailer if there's a sales tax charge, just to see if I can save a dollar or two.So when your state ends up with no instate businesses, so theres no more sales tax, and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis, then what?
When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize ... now what?Hallelujah!
I don't know about anywhere in NC, but in my area the government is involved in way too much, and should fuck off immediately.Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are, but you're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right.All I care about is 9-1-1, and then really only for fire.
The police can't come in time to help you when you REALLY need help, anyway; I already have all the help I can use right here *pat pat*For example, the roads where I live (Lake County, CA) are a complete scam; they've been "maintained" by the same group of companies for years now, and every time they work on the roads they get lumpier, no joke.
The biggest intersection in Lakeport, CA might as well be made out of speed bumps.
It's a Freeway Intersection.
Pathetic.And let's talk about one of the most common examples: The school system is not a system of education but one of indoctrination; I actually consider public school child abuse and object to being charged for it.I would like to see a lot less services "provided".
For instance, it could be argued that building permits are unconstitutional.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488737</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490289</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1246024860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They ARE responsible for it.  They're residents on NC, and voters.</p><p>Everyone is responsible for their government.  Even if you personally didn't vote for the crappy people in charge, you're to a certain extent responsible for their actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They ARE responsible for it .
They 're residents on NC , and voters.Everyone is responsible for their government .
Even if you personally did n't vote for the crappy people in charge , you 're to a certain extent responsible for their actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They ARE responsible for it.
They're residents on NC, and voters.Everyone is responsible for their government.
Even if you personally didn't vote for the crappy people in charge, you're to a certain extent responsible for their actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28532537</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1246390200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>Unfortunately, Amazon probably needed to demonstrate how serious they were I didn't see from TFA what stage this was at, but it sounded like it was simmering in the legislature.If it had passed the house and was to come to a vote for the Senate, that might have been a good time.  If it was on the governor's desk, that might have been a good time.But if it's really just being worked on now, this is way too much too soon.  They should have minimized the amount of time their affiliates would be out of business.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , Amazon probably needed to demonstrate how serious they were I did n't see from TFA what stage this was at , but it sounded like it was simmering in the legislature.If it had passed the house and was to come to a vote for the Senate , that might have been a good time .
If it was on the governor 's desk , that might have been a good time.But if it 's really just being worked on now , this is way too much too soon .
They should have minimized the amount of time their affiliates would be out of business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, Amazon probably needed to demonstrate how serious they were I didn't see from TFA what stage this was at, but it sounded like it was simmering in the legislature.If it had passed the house and was to come to a vote for the Senate, that might have been a good time.
If it was on the governor's desk, that might have been a good time.But if it's really just being worked on now, this is way too much too soon.
They should have minimized the amount of time their affiliates would be out of business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488761</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>chefmonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1246013160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>89\%? Umm... you understand that percentages are multiplied together -- not added together -- when applied to each other, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>89 \ % ?
Umm... you understand that percentages are multiplied together -- not added together -- when applied to each other , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>89\%?
Umm... you understand that percentages are multiplied together -- not added together -- when applied to each other, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486725</id>
	<title>Excuse?</title>
	<author>lsdi</author>
	<datestamp>1246047240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It looks like an Amazon's excuse to not deal with taxation and/or NC. I'm sure people in NC would agree to pay rather than stop doing business. There is something fishy in this case</htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like an Amazon 's excuse to not deal with taxation and/or NC .
I 'm sure people in NC would agree to pay rather than stop doing business .
There is something fishy in this case</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like an Amazon's excuse to not deal with taxation and/or NC.
I'm sure people in NC would agree to pay rather than stop doing business.
There is something fishy in this case</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487839</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246008660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking as a resident of NC, I think this law is a bad idea.  I'm of mixed mind on Amazon's response, but I can't really fault them for it.  The NC government has budget problems; they need to either cut spending or raise taxes.  Personally, I'm inclined to think they should do a bit of both.  However, I really think they should just raise income taxes, rather than trying to find new taxes that people won't notice as much.  Fewer, simpler taxes is a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as a resident of NC , I think this law is a bad idea .
I 'm of mixed mind on Amazon 's response , but I ca n't really fault them for it .
The NC government has budget problems ; they need to either cut spending or raise taxes .
Personally , I 'm inclined to think they should do a bit of both .
However , I really think they should just raise income taxes , rather than trying to find new taxes that people wo n't notice as much .
Fewer , simpler taxes is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as a resident of NC, I think this law is a bad idea.
I'm of mixed mind on Amazon's response, but I can't really fault them for it.
The NC government has budget problems; they need to either cut spending or raise taxes.
Personally, I'm inclined to think they should do a bit of both.
However, I really think they should just raise income taxes, rather than trying to find new taxes that people won't notice as much.
Fewer, simpler taxes is a good thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489123</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>644bd346996</author>
	<datestamp>1246015140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In normal times, a tax like this would probably be motivated by greed as you say. However, basically every state in the union is struggling to make ends meet in this economy. The NC legislature would rather enact new taxes on currently untaxed potential revenue streams than make hard and unpopular decisions to do things like close schools or parks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In normal times , a tax like this would probably be motivated by greed as you say .
However , basically every state in the union is struggling to make ends meet in this economy .
The NC legislature would rather enact new taxes on currently untaxed potential revenue streams than make hard and unpopular decisions to do things like close schools or parks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In normal times, a tax like this would probably be motivated by greed as you say.
However, basically every state in the union is struggling to make ends meet in this economy.
The NC legislature would rather enact new taxes on currently untaxed potential revenue streams than make hard and unpopular decisions to do things like close schools or parks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487315</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246049760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, you have it all wrong.  As a North Carolina citizen I can educate you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>We have the solution.  We give large internet companies (Google) tax breaks to do business here and provide jobs.  And in order to encourage other businesses to move into North Carolina, we tax them on all their sales made to North Carolina, regardless of where they are located.</p><p>As you can see this is a truely brillient plan.  Every well managed business would want to move to North Carolina since you can get the tax break and not have to pay.  Since no other state has allowed such a brillient idea, the companies operating in NC don't have to worry about taxes from other states, but all the operations in other states are liable to NC.</p><p>Okay okay, so this is one of those moments that makes me understand why surrounding states tend to refer to people here as 'ignorant pig farmers'.  I would like to point out that pig farmers aren't that stupid and this sort of thing could only be accomplished by the supreme intelligence of politicians.</p><p>If you've been watching the news recently and noticed, we have some down right AWESOME politicians.</p><p>Bear with us, the trendy 'I HATE BUSH' crowd thought it out long and hard and proudly elected an even more inept and mentally deficient batch of politicians than that last time around.  Unfortunately we have too many universities and people who vote based on some ideological theory rather than reality.</p><p>Okay, fine, don't bear with us.  Just please don't hold it against me personally, I'm leaving as fast as I can!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you have it all wrong .
As a North Carolina citizen I can educate you ...We have the solution .
We give large internet companies ( Google ) tax breaks to do business here and provide jobs .
And in order to encourage other businesses to move into North Carolina , we tax them on all their sales made to North Carolina , regardless of where they are located.As you can see this is a truely brillient plan .
Every well managed business would want to move to North Carolina since you can get the tax break and not have to pay .
Since no other state has allowed such a brillient idea , the companies operating in NC do n't have to worry about taxes from other states , but all the operations in other states are liable to NC.Okay okay , so this is one of those moments that makes me understand why surrounding states tend to refer to people here as 'ignorant pig farmers' .
I would like to point out that pig farmers are n't that stupid and this sort of thing could only be accomplished by the supreme intelligence of politicians.If you 've been watching the news recently and noticed , we have some down right AWESOME politicians.Bear with us , the trendy 'I HATE BUSH ' crowd thought it out long and hard and proudly elected an even more inept and mentally deficient batch of politicians than that last time around .
Unfortunately we have too many universities and people who vote based on some ideological theory rather than reality.Okay , fine , do n't bear with us .
Just please do n't hold it against me personally , I 'm leaving as fast as I can !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you have it all wrong.
As a North Carolina citizen I can educate you ...We have the solution.
We give large internet companies (Google) tax breaks to do business here and provide jobs.
And in order to encourage other businesses to move into North Carolina, we tax them on all their sales made to North Carolina, regardless of where they are located.As you can see this is a truely brillient plan.
Every well managed business would want to move to North Carolina since you can get the tax break and not have to pay.
Since no other state has allowed such a brillient idea, the companies operating in NC don't have to worry about taxes from other states, but all the operations in other states are liable to NC.Okay okay, so this is one of those moments that makes me understand why surrounding states tend to refer to people here as 'ignorant pig farmers'.
I would like to point out that pig farmers aren't that stupid and this sort of thing could only be accomplished by the supreme intelligence of politicians.If you've been watching the news recently and noticed, we have some down right AWESOME politicians.Bear with us, the trendy 'I HATE BUSH' crowd thought it out long and hard and proudly elected an even more inept and mentally deficient batch of politicians than that last time around.
Unfortunately we have too many universities and people who vote based on some ideological theory rather than reality.Okay, fine, don't bear with us.
Just please don't hold it against me personally, I'm leaving as fast as I can!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488519</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246011600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess we'll just have to figure out which is better; profit motive or prosperity motive. For all I've seen it's already the case where (corporate) business is run like a government and governments are run like businesses, the only differences between the various businesses and governments are the way votes are made by constituents/citizens and exactly how much power members of an organizations have over the owners.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess we 'll just have to figure out which is better ; profit motive or prosperity motive .
For all I 've seen it 's already the case where ( corporate ) business is run like a government and governments are run like businesses , the only differences between the various businesses and governments are the way votes are made by constituents/citizens and exactly how much power members of an organizations have over the owners .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess we'll just have to figure out which is better; profit motive or prosperity motive.
For all I've seen it's already the case where (corporate) business is run like a government and governments are run like businesses, the only differences between the various businesses and governments are the way votes are made by constituents/citizens and exactly how much power members of an organizations have over the owners.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490161</id>
	<title>I'm from NC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246023480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm from NC and what you don't know is that we already kind of pay a sales tax for things we buy on the internet.</p><p>It's called the estimated tax. First the tax form asks you if you kept records for all your internet purchases (who does that by the way?) When you say no then there is a table where you are supposed to estimate how much you spent based on your income! Thats right, a sales tax based on income! Then you take that estimated amount you spent and multiply it by the sales tax rate of your respective county.</p><p>But who the hell would be honest on one of these forms? Ok Mr. Politician I bought a lot of stuff online this year, of course you can never prove that but I'm just going to volunteer to pay you more than I absolutely have to.(!)</p><p>Much easier to get Amazon to collect it for you and since Amazon has no facilities in NC lets claim the Amazon Affiliates are the taxing "nexus" that gets the revenuer's foot in the door.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm from NC and what you do n't know is that we already kind of pay a sales tax for things we buy on the internet.It 's called the estimated tax .
First the tax form asks you if you kept records for all your internet purchases ( who does that by the way ?
) When you say no then there is a table where you are supposed to estimate how much you spent based on your income !
Thats right , a sales tax based on income !
Then you take that estimated amount you spent and multiply it by the sales tax rate of your respective county.But who the hell would be honest on one of these forms ?
Ok Mr. Politician I bought a lot of stuff online this year , of course you can never prove that but I 'm just going to volunteer to pay you more than I absolutely have to. ( !
) Much easier to get Amazon to collect it for you and since Amazon has no facilities in NC lets claim the Amazon Affiliates are the taxing " nexus " that gets the revenuer 's foot in the door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm from NC and what you don't know is that we already kind of pay a sales tax for things we buy on the internet.It's called the estimated tax.
First the tax form asks you if you kept records for all your internet purchases (who does that by the way?
) When you say no then there is a table where you are supposed to estimate how much you spent based on your income!
Thats right, a sales tax based on income!
Then you take that estimated amount you spent and multiply it by the sales tax rate of your respective county.But who the hell would be honest on one of these forms?
Ok Mr. Politician I bought a lot of stuff online this year, of course you can never prove that but I'm just going to volunteer to pay you more than I absolutely have to.(!
)Much easier to get Amazon to collect it for you and since Amazon has no facilities in NC lets claim the Amazon Affiliates are the taxing "nexus" that gets the revenuer's foot in the door.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489981</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246021380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it"<br>This is complete bullshit.</p><p>They always are looking at how they are spending it, and trying to improve it.</p><p>I am really sick of you morons going on about government finance you know NOTHING about.</p><p>"but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly, if it wouldn't be run more efficiently. "<br>I got news for you, almost all government agency are more efficiently the corporations.</p><p>Your perception is skewed because almost no errors are publicized with corporations and ONLY errors are reported from the government.</p><p>"save money or to use it wisely. "<br>not true.</p><p>"They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives"<br>Your just being an asshole there.</p><p>"So I have to wonder, what motives would cause governments at local, state and even federal levels to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?"</p><p>They do. The fact that it's more expensive to do something well then you know is irrelevant.<br>Pretty much every government service that gets privatized has failed. Why? no money to make.</p><p>I suggest you learn to read annual Budget and actual reports, and look into the actual cost of building something.<br>All the information is public.</p><p>It is not without problems, bu so does any large organization, and since you seem t be lumping all government service under one umbrella, that's a fucking huge organization. We are talking about 10'd of thousands of projects done every day, o ntime at on or under budget.</p><p>If anyone in government was as off with estimates as corporate projects are would loose their job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" At every turn , government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it " This is complete bullshit.They always are looking at how they are spending it , and trying to improve it.I am really sick of you morons going on about government finance you know NOTHING about .
" but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly , if it would n't be run more efficiently .
" I got news for you , almost all government agency are more efficiently the corporations.Your perception is skewed because almost no errors are publicized with corporations and ONLY errors are reported from the government .
" save money or to use it wisely .
" not true .
" They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives " Your just being an asshole there .
" So I have to wonder , what motives would cause governments at local , state and even federal levels to deliver " good service " to the people at the lowest cost possible ?
" They do .
The fact that it 's more expensive to do something well then you know is irrelevant.Pretty much every government service that gets privatized has failed .
Why ? no money to make.I suggest you learn to read annual Budget and actual reports , and look into the actual cost of building something.All the information is public.It is not without problems , bu so does any large organization , and since you seem t be lumping all government service under one umbrella , that 's a fucking huge organization .
We are talking about 10 'd of thousands of projects done every day , o ntime at on or under budget.If anyone in government was as off with estimates as corporate projects are would loose their job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it"This is complete bullshit.They always are looking at how they are spending it, and trying to improve it.I am really sick of you morons going on about government finance you know NOTHING about.
"but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly, if it wouldn't be run more efficiently.
"I got news for you, almost all government agency are more efficiently the corporations.Your perception is skewed because almost no errors are publicized with corporations and ONLY errors are reported from the government.
"save money or to use it wisely.
"not true.
"They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives"Your just being an asshole there.
"So I have to wonder, what motives would cause governments at local, state and even federal levels to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?
"They do.
The fact that it's more expensive to do something well then you know is irrelevant.Pretty much every government service that gets privatized has failed.
Why? no money to make.I suggest you learn to read annual Budget and actual reports, and look into the actual cost of building something.All the information is public.It is not without problems, bu so does any large organization, and since you seem t be lumping all government service under one umbrella, that's a fucking huge organization.
We are talking about 10'd of thousands of projects done every day, o ntime at on or under budget.If anyone in government was as off with estimates as corporate projects are would loose their job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487215</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>sunking2</author>
	<datestamp>1246049400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is plenty of services and software available that handles this almost perfectly. Its 2009, do you think we can't handle a simple address to tax code translation? There are tons of databases that work off street address to tax, and some that even go address -&gt; long/lat -&gt; tax code.</p><p>It's not that big a deal and brick and morter businesses that ship have been doing it for ages. Why is it suddenly so difficult for online stores?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is plenty of services and software available that handles this almost perfectly .
Its 2009 , do you think we ca n't handle a simple address to tax code translation ?
There are tons of databases that work off street address to tax , and some that even go address - &gt; long/lat - &gt; tax code.It 's not that big a deal and brick and morter businesses that ship have been doing it for ages .
Why is it suddenly so difficult for online stores ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is plenty of services and software available that handles this almost perfectly.
Its 2009, do you think we can't handle a simple address to tax code translation?
There are tons of databases that work off street address to tax, and some that even go address -&gt; long/lat -&gt; tax code.It's not that big a deal and brick and morter businesses that ship have been doing it for ages.
Why is it suddenly so difficult for online stores?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487305</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>davester666</author>
	<datestamp>1246049700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, nowadays, US (and IMO, to a lesser extent, European and Asian) corporations, they are primarily looking at their numbers for the current quarter, and the next quarter.  This will have a negative effect on the numbers, so they are trying to mitigate that effect.</p><p>It's also not solely Amazon's "fault".  The citizen's of the state are (probably) required to declare these out-of-state purchases and pay taxes on them directly to the local and/or state governments.  So the citizens could actually be guilt of criminal tax evasion, but this 'crime' is both probably widespread AND would be extremely unpopular for the state tax collector to actively prosecute.  So, the citizen's are choosing slightly cheaper prices over paying for their local roads and schools.</p><p>It's just orders of magnitude easier for the state tax collector to get the money from a few large entities (like Amazon), who have pretty good accounting systems about who bought how much and where it was shipped to, than for them to try to get all their residents to individually track and then declare/pay taxes on these purchases at the end of each year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , nowadays , US ( and IMO , to a lesser extent , European and Asian ) corporations , they are primarily looking at their numbers for the current quarter , and the next quarter .
This will have a negative effect on the numbers , so they are trying to mitigate that effect.It 's also not solely Amazon 's " fault " .
The citizen 's of the state are ( probably ) required to declare these out-of-state purchases and pay taxes on them directly to the local and/or state governments .
So the citizens could actually be guilt of criminal tax evasion , but this 'crime ' is both probably widespread AND would be extremely unpopular for the state tax collector to actively prosecute .
So , the citizen 's are choosing slightly cheaper prices over paying for their local roads and schools.It 's just orders of magnitude easier for the state tax collector to get the money from a few large entities ( like Amazon ) , who have pretty good accounting systems about who bought how much and where it was shipped to , than for them to try to get all their residents to individually track and then declare/pay taxes on these purchases at the end of each year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, nowadays, US (and IMO, to a lesser extent, European and Asian) corporations, they are primarily looking at their numbers for the current quarter, and the next quarter.
This will have a negative effect on the numbers, so they are trying to mitigate that effect.It's also not solely Amazon's "fault".
The citizen's of the state are (probably) required to declare these out-of-state purchases and pay taxes on them directly to the local and/or state governments.
So the citizens could actually be guilt of criminal tax evasion, but this 'crime' is both probably widespread AND would be extremely unpopular for the state tax collector to actively prosecute.
So, the citizen's are choosing slightly cheaper prices over paying for their local roads and schools.It's just orders of magnitude easier for the state tax collector to get the money from a few large entities (like Amazon), who have pretty good accounting systems about who bought how much and where it was shipped to, than for them to try to get all their residents to individually track and then declare/pay taxes on these purchases at the end of each year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488091</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>WheelDweller</author>
	<datestamp>1246009860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AMEN!  It's the core of what made America great!</p><p>This is parallel to the Roe Vs Wade case. When something isn't in the Constitution, it then falls to the states to decide.  Instead, a handful of people we can't vote out decided FOR US that abortion was somehow in the Constitution (never read it in there...) and all states were required to agree.</p><p>Abortion's murder alright, but in places where they think differently, they should have the right to enact their own law. This was one of hundreds of other bad laws that error on the side of smothering us with Federal power.</p><p>The next one is Healthcare. They want the power to control who lives and dies, period. Only then can we arguably get rid of inconvenient people, legally.  The old, the sick, the unwanted babies, the car salesmen, the people who don't agree with the president...</p><p>It's time to ask questions. It's time to call a congressman.  Time to pay attention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AMEN !
It 's the core of what made America great ! This is parallel to the Roe Vs Wade case .
When something is n't in the Constitution , it then falls to the states to decide .
Instead , a handful of people we ca n't vote out decided FOR US that abortion was somehow in the Constitution ( never read it in there... ) and all states were required to agree.Abortion 's murder alright , but in places where they think differently , they should have the right to enact their own law .
This was one of hundreds of other bad laws that error on the side of smothering us with Federal power.The next one is Healthcare .
They want the power to control who lives and dies , period .
Only then can we arguably get rid of inconvenient people , legally .
The old , the sick , the unwanted babies , the car salesmen , the people who do n't agree with the president...It 's time to ask questions .
It 's time to call a congressman .
Time to pay attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AMEN!
It's the core of what made America great!This is parallel to the Roe Vs Wade case.
When something isn't in the Constitution, it then falls to the states to decide.
Instead, a handful of people we can't vote out decided FOR US that abortion was somehow in the Constitution (never read it in there...) and all states were required to agree.Abortion's murder alright, but in places where they think differently, they should have the right to enact their own law.
This was one of hundreds of other bad laws that error on the side of smothering us with Federal power.The next one is Healthcare.
They want the power to control who lives and dies, period.
Only then can we arguably get rid of inconvenient people, legally.
The old, the sick, the unwanted babies, the car salesmen, the people who don't agree with the president...It's time to ask questions.
It's time to call a congressman.
Time to pay attention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488869</id>
	<title>Untrue.</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1246013700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;States/cities/counties/etc. don't complete based on tax rates.</p><p>I know for a fact this is untrue.</p><p>When Hyundai set up shop in Montgomery, Alabama, there were huge tax incentives for them to do so.</p><p>When Bass Pro Shops set up shop in Prattvile, Alabama, they get a deal where they could split the sales tax revenue with the city.</p><p>States and cities DO make sweetheart tax incentive deals with big businesses in the hopes of luring them to set up shop in their jurisdiction, because of the revenue and jobs they bring to the area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; States/cities/counties/etc .
do n't complete based on tax rates.I know for a fact this is untrue.When Hyundai set up shop in Montgomery , Alabama , there were huge tax incentives for them to do so.When Bass Pro Shops set up shop in Prattvile , Alabama , they get a deal where they could split the sales tax revenue with the city.States and cities DO make sweetheart tax incentive deals with big businesses in the hopes of luring them to set up shop in their jurisdiction , because of the revenue and jobs they bring to the area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;States/cities/counties/etc.
don't complete based on tax rates.I know for a fact this is untrue.When Hyundai set up shop in Montgomery, Alabama, there were huge tax incentives for them to do so.When Bass Pro Shops set up shop in Prattvile, Alabama, they get a deal where they could split the sales tax revenue with the city.States and cities DO make sweetheart tax incentive deals with big businesses in the hopes of luring them to set up shop in their jurisdiction, because of the revenue and jobs they bring to the area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488023</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>AlHunt</author>
	<datestamp>1246009560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and the federal government could maintain a database searchable<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Sorry, I'm against anything requiring another federal government database.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ...and the federal government could maintain a database searchable ...Sorry , I 'm against anything requiring another federal government database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; ...and the federal government could maintain a database searchable ...Sorry, I'm against anything requiring another federal government database.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489553</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246018020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WHO IS JOHN GALT?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WHO IS JOHN GALT ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WHO IS JOHN GALT?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1246049640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it is unfortunate that N.C. sellers had to suffer for it, but I have to agree with Amazon's action on this.  At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it.  Ultimately, I believe, they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors.  I wish there were a better way to run government.  I vaguely recall one or more SciFi movies in the past where a city became a business or something to that end... the prospect was frightening, but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly, if it wouldn't be run more efficiently.  One problem with current styles of government is that there is little to no incentive to save money or to use it wisely.  They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives.  So I have to wonder, what motives would cause governments at local, state and even federal levels to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it is unfortunate that N.C. sellers had to suffer for it , but I have to agree with Amazon 's action on this .
At every turn , government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it .
Ultimately , I believe , they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors .
I wish there were a better way to run government .
I vaguely recall one or more SciFi movies in the past where a city became a business or something to that end... the prospect was frightening , but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly , if it would n't be run more efficiently .
One problem with current styles of government is that there is little to no incentive to save money or to use it wisely .
They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives .
So I have to wonder , what motives would cause governments at local , state and even federal levels to deliver " good service " to the people at the lowest cost possible ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it is unfortunate that N.C. sellers had to suffer for it, but I have to agree with Amazon's action on this.
At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it.
Ultimately, I believe, they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors.
I wish there were a better way to run government.
I vaguely recall one or more SciFi movies in the past where a city became a business or something to that end... the prospect was frightening, but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly, if it wouldn't be run more efficiently.
One problem with current styles of government is that there is little to no incentive to save money or to use it wisely.
They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives.
So I have to wonder, what motives would cause governments at local, state and even federal levels to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486967</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246048500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you need to make your sarcasm a bit more obvious. Someone might get the impression that you actually <em>agreed</em> with NC on this issue. That would, of course, be utterly ridiculous--but given the kinds of people one meets online it's hard to be certain, and not every detects sarcasm well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you need to make your sarcasm a bit more obvious .
Someone might get the impression that you actually agreed with NC on this issue .
That would , of course , be utterly ridiculous--but given the kinds of people one meets online it 's hard to be certain , and not every detects sarcasm well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you need to make your sarcasm a bit more obvious.
Someone might get the impression that you actually agreed with NC on this issue.
That would, of course, be utterly ridiculous--but given the kinds of people one meets online it's hard to be certain, and not every detects sarcasm well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28503055</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Mr2001</author>
	<datestamp>1246197780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the government were smart, they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything. Since they weren't that smart, they need to pay the price for their incompetence.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, it's not some faceless "they" in the capitol that suffers, it's everyone.</p><p>The economy is basically investment + private spending + government spending. When two of those dry up, things get bad. When all three dry up, things get even worse. If money isn't changing hands, there's no economy.</p><p>And when you look more closely at what the government is spending money on, the situation is worse still. In a recession, the need for things like food stamps and Medicaid rises at the same time as the tax revenue to pay for them falls.</p><p>State governments don't have the liberty that the federal government does to keep on spending even as tax revenue falls. Raising taxes to keep paying for state services sucks, but it's better than deepening the recession and its impact on citizens by letting those services disappear.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the government were smart , they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything .
Since they were n't that smart , they need to pay the price for their incompetence.Unfortunately , it 's not some faceless " they " in the capitol that suffers , it 's everyone.The economy is basically investment + private spending + government spending .
When two of those dry up , things get bad .
When all three dry up , things get even worse .
If money is n't changing hands , there 's no economy.And when you look more closely at what the government is spending money on , the situation is worse still .
In a recession , the need for things like food stamps and Medicaid rises at the same time as the tax revenue to pay for them falls.State governments do n't have the liberty that the federal government does to keep on spending even as tax revenue falls .
Raising taxes to keep paying for state services sucks , but it 's better than deepening the recession and its impact on citizens by letting those services disappear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the government were smart, they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything.
Since they weren't that smart, they need to pay the price for their incompetence.Unfortunately, it's not some faceless "they" in the capitol that suffers, it's everyone.The economy is basically investment + private spending + government spending.
When two of those dry up, things get bad.
When all three dry up, things get even worse.
If money isn't changing hands, there's no economy.And when you look more closely at what the government is spending money on, the situation is worse still.
In a recession, the need for things like food stamps and Medicaid rises at the same time as the tax revenue to pay for them falls.State governments don't have the liberty that the federal government does to keep on spending even as tax revenue falls.
Raising taxes to keep paying for state services sucks, but it's better than deepening the recession and its impact on citizens by letting those services disappear.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490273</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488649</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1246012500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>Honestly, you can pay extra if you want, without anyone else having to pay extra.  When you fill out your state income taxes, just write the check out for an extra $20,000.  The treasury will be more than happy to accept the extra money you want to pay.</p><p>But, of course, you don't do that.  Because, honestly, you really want <i>other people</i> to pay so <i>you</i> can direct the money to buy things you value.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I 'd rather pay 7 \ % for ...Honestly , you can pay extra if you want , without anyone else having to pay extra .
When you fill out your state income taxes , just write the check out for an extra $ 20,000 .
The treasury will be more than happy to accept the extra money you want to pay.But , of course , you do n't do that .
Because , honestly , you really want other people to pay so you can direct the money to buy things you value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I'd rather pay 7\% for ...Honestly, you can pay extra if you want, without anyone else having to pay extra.
When you fill out your state income taxes, just write the check out for an extra $20,000.
The treasury will be more than happy to accept the extra money you want to pay.But, of course, you don't do that.
Because, honestly, you really want other people to pay so you can direct the money to buy things you value.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488111</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246009980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if my Star Trek history lessons have anything to say, socialized government workers would be motivated by the thrill of politics and serving the people instead of their monetary needs, bu then you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere.</p><p>They've already tried this in part with the benefits provided to them... for life, but people still seem to want more.  This is why I believe socialism probably can't work as a basis for a country over a long period of time.  Not with the free market.</p><p>Another proposition I heard about a while back was a complex computer program that determines the benefit and repercussions of a law before enacting it... basically turning government over to a computer.  That has it's own disadvantages though.  (Namely: People don't think logically.  IE: a computer would see no advantage to keeping a mentally handicap person alive.)</p><p>What to do so that people are rewarded for good officiating and punished for improper actions?  How about properly punishing them in the first place?  Too many officials get away with things because of who they are.  How many government officials have ever been stripped of their benefits packages for messing up and where do you draw the line of "messed up bad enough"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if my Star Trek history lessons have anything to say , socialized government workers would be motivated by the thrill of politics and serving the people instead of their monetary needs , bu then you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere.They 've already tried this in part with the benefits provided to them... for life , but people still seem to want more .
This is why I believe socialism probably ca n't work as a basis for a country over a long period of time .
Not with the free market.Another proposition I heard about a while back was a complex computer program that determines the benefit and repercussions of a law before enacting it... basically turning government over to a computer .
That has it 's own disadvantages though .
( Namely : People do n't think logically .
IE : a computer would see no advantage to keeping a mentally handicap person alive .
) What to do so that people are rewarded for good officiating and punished for improper actions ?
How about properly punishing them in the first place ?
Too many officials get away with things because of who they are .
How many government officials have ever been stripped of their benefits packages for messing up and where do you draw the line of " messed up bad enough " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if my Star Trek history lessons have anything to say, socialized government workers would be motivated by the thrill of politics and serving the people instead of their monetary needs, bu then you look at it from the perspective of the government official and see all those capitalist salaries and wonder why you are still in government when you can afford that yacht by working elsewhere.They've already tried this in part with the benefits provided to them... for life, but people still seem to want more.
This is why I believe socialism probably can't work as a basis for a country over a long period of time.
Not with the free market.Another proposition I heard about a while back was a complex computer program that determines the benefit and repercussions of a law before enacting it... basically turning government over to a computer.
That has it's own disadvantages though.
(Namely: People don't think logically.
IE: a computer would see no advantage to keeping a mentally handicap person alive.
)What to do so that people are rewarded for good officiating and punished for improper actions?
How about properly punishing them in the first place?
Too many officials get away with things because of who they are.
How many government officials have ever been stripped of their benefits packages for messing up and where do you draw the line of "messed up bad enough"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487883</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>kaiser423</author>
	<datestamp>1246008900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made. eighty. nine. fucking. percent. </p></div><p>I call bullshit.  Seriously.  I've worked for a number of small companies, and I've never seen any loading or tax liability anywhere near that.  What the hell are you doing wrong to get to 89\% (my guess?  He's calculating it horribly wrong).
<br> <br>
Really, I would really like to know, because I would love to rally against it like nobody's business, but I just can't even come close to conjuring up a scenario where 89\% is the actual tax liability.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without any kind of business expenses , I would be taxed 89 \ % on every dollar I made .
eighty. nine .
fucking. percent .
I call bullshit .
Seriously. I 've worked for a number of small companies , and I 've never seen any loading or tax liability anywhere near that .
What the hell are you doing wrong to get to 89 \ % ( my guess ?
He 's calculating it horribly wrong ) .
Really , I would really like to know , because I would love to rally against it like nobody 's business , but I just ca n't even come close to conjuring up a scenario where 89 \ % is the actual tax liability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89\% on every dollar I made.
eighty. nine.
fucking. percent.
I call bullshit.
Seriously.  I've worked for a number of small companies, and I've never seen any loading or tax liability anywhere near that.
What the hell are you doing wrong to get to 89\% (my guess?
He's calculating it horribly wrong).
Really, I would really like to know, because I would love to rally against it like nobody's business, but I just can't even come close to conjuring up a scenario where 89\% is the actual tax liability.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490273</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1246024680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They weren't complaining this much when the economy was booming, were they?  Even though the tax scheme and tax rates were the same as they are now.  But now, the economy sucks and people are out of work, so the government's mad because they're not getting as much money.</p><p>Instead of raising taxes, they need to learn to do more with less, and cut back on non-essentials.  That's what the rest of us have had to do.</p><p>If the government were smart, they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything.  Since they weren't that smart, they need to pay the price for their incompetence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were n't complaining this much when the economy was booming , were they ?
Even though the tax scheme and tax rates were the same as they are now .
But now , the economy sucks and people are out of work , so the government 's mad because they 're not getting as much money.Instead of raising taxes , they need to learn to do more with less , and cut back on non-essentials .
That 's what the rest of us have had to do.If the government were smart , they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything .
Since they were n't that smart , they need to pay the price for their incompetence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They weren't complaining this much when the economy was booming, were they?
Even though the tax scheme and tax rates were the same as they are now.
But now, the economy sucks and people are out of work, so the government's mad because they're not getting as much money.Instead of raising taxes, they need to learn to do more with less, and cut back on non-essentials.
That's what the rest of us have had to do.If the government were smart, they would have saved up a lot of money during the boom time so they could ride out the recessions without changing anything.
Since they weren't that smart, they need to pay the price for their incompetence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487839</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494229</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1246113180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity?</p></div><p>Buggy-whip manufacturers were no doubt quite upset with the proliferation of the horseless carriage. I suppose they should have lobbied for laws to make them illegal.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution, and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping, their customers will be more likely to patronize local business.</p></div><p>When you buy physical goods via the internet, you are already paying taxes; the goods must be delivered.</p><p>If local business cannot compete on its own merit, it should be permitted to fail.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I doubt this has anything to do with "campaign donors and higher pay", which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism.</p></div><p>Following the money is always a good idea; neither one of us has done this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity ? Buggy-whip manufacturers were no doubt quite upset with the proliferation of the horseless carriage .
I suppose they should have lobbied for laws to make them illegal.Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution , and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping , their customers will be more likely to patronize local business.When you buy physical goods via the internet , you are already paying taxes ; the goods must be delivered.If local business can not compete on its own merit , it should be permitted to fail.I doubt this has anything to do with " campaign donors and higher pay " , which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism.Following the money is always a good idea ; neither one of us has done this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity?Buggy-whip manufacturers were no doubt quite upset with the proliferation of the horseless carriage.
I suppose they should have lobbied for laws to make them illegal.Amazon sneaks in as an interstate institution, and they know that if residents have to pay tax in addition to shipping, their customers will be more likely to patronize local business.When you buy physical goods via the internet, you are already paying taxes; the goods must be delivered.If local business cannot compete on its own merit, it should be permitted to fail.I doubt this has anything to do with "campaign donors and higher pay", which sounds like knee-jerk AM radio conservatism.Following the money is always a good idea; neither one of us has done this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488737</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246012980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So just curious, as more and more companies do like Amazon and more and more purchases are made from out of state due to this sort of web service<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.</p><p>Amazon seems to have no problem taking money from people in North Carolina.  I don't see them paying their own state any taxes on those sales.</p><p>Its not like they don't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.</p><p>Its not like Amazon itself is paying the taxes to NC.</p><p>Don't feed me some bullshit about how their system doesn't support it and how expensive it would be to add, if QuickBooks can deal with mutlistate taxes its your own damn fault for buying/creating something for a company the size of Amazon that can deal with global accounting.</p><p>So when your state ends up with no instate businesses, so theres no more sales tax, and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis, then what?  When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... now what?</p><p>Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are, but you're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So just curious , as more and more companies do like Amazon and more and more purchases are made from out of state due to this sort of web service ...What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.Amazon seems to have no problem taking money from people in North Carolina .
I do n't see them paying their own state any taxes on those sales.Its not like they do n't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.Its not like Amazon itself is paying the taxes to NC.Do n't feed me some bullshit about how their system does n't support it and how expensive it would be to add , if QuickBooks can deal with mutlistate taxes its your own damn fault for buying/creating something for a company the size of Amazon that can deal with global accounting.So when your state ends up with no instate businesses , so theres no more sales tax , and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis , then what ?
When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize ... now what ? Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are , but you 're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So just curious, as more and more companies do like Amazon and more and more purchases are made from out of state due to this sort of web service ...What do you think states should do to deal with the lost revenue.Amazon seems to have no problem taking money from people in North Carolina.
I don't see them paying their own state any taxes on those sales.Its not like they don't just pass sales tax along to the customer like every other business ANYWAY.Its not like Amazon itself is paying the taxes to NC.Don't feed me some bullshit about how their system doesn't support it and how expensive it would be to add, if QuickBooks can deal with mutlistate taxes its your own damn fault for buying/creating something for a company the size of Amazon that can deal with global accounting.So when your state ends up with no instate businesses, so theres no more sales tax, and suddenly you have no money to fund all the shit that you take advantage of on a daily basis, then what?
When you start losing city services that these taxes subsidize ... now what?Its nice to rant and rave about how evil taxes are, but you're tone will change the instant you lose some precious amenity that you probably think of as a god given right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488549</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1246011780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How and why is Amazon supposed to be treated differently than say, Walmart?</p><p>Walmart seems to be able to handle the tax issue, why is it Amazon can't do the same?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How and why is Amazon supposed to be treated differently than say , Walmart ? Walmart seems to be able to handle the tax issue , why is it Amazon ca n't do the same ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How and why is Amazon supposed to be treated differently than say, Walmart?Walmart seems to be able to handle the tax issue, why is it Amazon can't do the same?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489473</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246017240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only they <i>would</i> have the balls to stop selling to states that tried to enforce a tax on out-of-state purchases...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only they would have the balls to stop selling to states that tried to enforce a tax on out-of-state purchases.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only they would have the balls to stop selling to states that tried to enforce a tax on out-of-state purchases...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488397</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28524309</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>soren202</author>
	<datestamp>1246297380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, but it's still a bit of a dick move on their part.</p><p>It probably would have been a better idea to give the people they were ditching a firm notice ahead of time, rather than ditch them after only a "probably at some point" type warning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , but it 's still a bit of a dick move on their part.It probably would have been a better idea to give the people they were ditching a firm notice ahead of time , rather than ditch them after only a " probably at some point " type warning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, but it's still a bit of a dick move on their part.It probably would have been a better idea to give the people they were ditching a firm notice ahead of time, rather than ditch them after only a "probably at some point" type warning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488427</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246011180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About half of Robert Heinlein's later work had corporation-cities.  Just look at \_The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress\_.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About half of Robert Heinlein 's later work had corporation-cities .
Just look at \ _The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress \ _ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About half of Robert Heinlein's later work had corporation-cities.
Just look at \_The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress\_.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486737</id>
	<title>Re:While your at it......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What has happened to North Carolina lately?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What has happened to North Carolina lately ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What has happened to North Carolina lately?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>samweber</author>
	<datestamp>1246010880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, currently in NC businesses which sell directly to NC residents collect sales tax, but NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon don't.  Whether or not you agree with NC's proposal, there are more factors here which I don't think you've considered.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thing</p></div><p>To the contrary, the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes.  There's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%.</p></div><p>Firstly, the proposed change in no way "grows" the government.  It is simply an additional revenue stream.  Secondly, since as you say the economy has dropped 20\%, that means that NC is collecting about 20\% less revenue. I highly doubt that this proposal will even come close to making up for this, so in total NC's revenue will be shrinking, not growing.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.</p></div><p>Actually, there are good reasons why you want to do this.</p><p>First of all, the state's expenditures naturally increase during a recession.  Why?  Firstly, the basic costs of maintaining infrastructure do not decrease drastically: potholes in highways still need to be fixed, electric poles which fall during a storm need to be repaired, etc.</p><p>Secondly, consider that the 20\% drop in the economy is not applied evenly.  This year nearly 50\% of college graduates didn't manage to find jobs.  That is a lot of talent that is being wasted.  Also, for example, some friends of mine used to be a two-income family until, in one week, one was laid off and the other had a 30\% pay cut.  That's a family that is now trying to live on one-third of their usual income, but their mortgage payments aren't any lower.  As a result there is a lot of capable people who suddenly find themselves in deep financial trouble, if not homeless.</p><p>Because of this, the state's unemployment insurance program, its support for working families who aren't able to afford enough food for their children, homeless shelters, etc experience a large increase in the number of applicants.  So, the costs of these programs rise, at the exact time that revenue falls.</p><p>What is the state to do?  Not only would it be immoral to let people starve to death, it is foolish: dead people will never get jobs and help the economy in the future.  You want all these talented people to be earning money, not dying in a tent city.</p><p>Instead, you DO want to have new government programs to help the economy.  Take some of those unemployed civil engineering graduates and have them design better infrastructure for the cities, and then hire other unemployed people to build it.  Not only do you get to enjoy the benefits in the future, but the newly employed people then spend their pay at local shops and stores, which means that those businesses have more sales, which means that they no longer have to lay people off or go bankrupt.  This will improve the economy, and once it has recovered any loans that had to be made can be paid off.  This just makes sense, and has worked before.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , currently in NC businesses which sell directly to NC residents collect sales tax , but NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon do n't .
Whether or not you agree with NC 's proposal , there are more factors here which I do n't think you 've considered.the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thingTo the contrary , the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes .
There 's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20 \ % .Firstly , the proposed change in no way " grows " the government .
It is simply an additional revenue stream .
Secondly , since as you say the economy has dropped 20 \ % , that means that NC is collecting about 20 \ % less revenue .
I highly doubt that this proposal will even come close to making up for this , so in total NC 's revenue will be shrinking , not growing.To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity , or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.Actually , there are good reasons why you want to do this.First of all , the state 's expenditures naturally increase during a recession .
Why ? Firstly , the basic costs of maintaining infrastructure do not decrease drastically : potholes in highways still need to be fixed , electric poles which fall during a storm need to be repaired , etc.Secondly , consider that the 20 \ % drop in the economy is not applied evenly .
This year nearly 50 \ % of college graduates did n't manage to find jobs .
That is a lot of talent that is being wasted .
Also , for example , some friends of mine used to be a two-income family until , in one week , one was laid off and the other had a 30 \ % pay cut .
That 's a family that is now trying to live on one-third of their usual income , but their mortgage payments are n't any lower .
As a result there is a lot of capable people who suddenly find themselves in deep financial trouble , if not homeless.Because of this , the state 's unemployment insurance program , its support for working families who are n't able to afford enough food for their children , homeless shelters , etc experience a large increase in the number of applicants .
So , the costs of these programs rise , at the exact time that revenue falls.What is the state to do ?
Not only would it be immoral to let people starve to death , it is foolish : dead people will never get jobs and help the economy in the future .
You want all these talented people to be earning money , not dying in a tent city.Instead , you DO want to have new government programs to help the economy .
Take some of those unemployed civil engineering graduates and have them design better infrastructure for the cities , and then hire other unemployed people to build it .
Not only do you get to enjoy the benefits in the future , but the newly employed people then spend their pay at local shops and stores , which means that those businesses have more sales , which means that they no longer have to lay people off or go bankrupt .
This will improve the economy , and once it has recovered any loans that had to be made can be paid off .
This just makes sense , and has worked before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, currently in NC businesses which sell directly to NC residents collect sales tax, but NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon don't.
Whether or not you agree with NC's proposal, there are more factors here which I don't think you've considered.the founders of this great nation realized that smuggling was a good thingTo the contrary, the United States was set up as a nation of laws and with the assumption that there would be taxes.
There's nothing that excuses smugglers from the legal system.But there is no reason why the governments should have license to grow when its supporting economy just dropped 20\%.Firstly, the proposed change in no way "grows" the government.
It is simply an additional revenue stream.
Secondly, since as you say the economy has dropped 20\%, that means that NC is collecting about 20\% less revenue.
I highly doubt that this proposal will even come close to making up for this, so in total NC's revenue will be shrinking, not growing.To argue otherwise is to argue that you can tax a nation into prosperity, or that you can lift yourself up by your boot straps.Actually, there are good reasons why you want to do this.First of all, the state's expenditures naturally increase during a recession.
Why?  Firstly, the basic costs of maintaining infrastructure do not decrease drastically: potholes in highways still need to be fixed, electric poles which fall during a storm need to be repaired, etc.Secondly, consider that the 20\% drop in the economy is not applied evenly.
This year nearly 50\% of college graduates didn't manage to find jobs.
That is a lot of talent that is being wasted.
Also, for example, some friends of mine used to be a two-income family until, in one week, one was laid off and the other had a 30\% pay cut.
That's a family that is now trying to live on one-third of their usual income, but their mortgage payments aren't any lower.
As a result there is a lot of capable people who suddenly find themselves in deep financial trouble, if not homeless.Because of this, the state's unemployment insurance program, its support for working families who aren't able to afford enough food for their children, homeless shelters, etc experience a large increase in the number of applicants.
So, the costs of these programs rise, at the exact time that revenue falls.What is the state to do?
Not only would it be immoral to let people starve to death, it is foolish: dead people will never get jobs and help the economy in the future.
You want all these talented people to be earning money, not dying in a tent city.Instead, you DO want to have new government programs to help the economy.
Take some of those unemployed civil engineering graduates and have them design better infrastructure for the cities, and then hire other unemployed people to build it.
Not only do you get to enjoy the benefits in the future, but the newly employed people then spend their pay at local shops and stores, which means that those businesses have more sales, which means that they no longer have to lay people off or go bankrupt.
This will improve the economy, and once it has recovered any loans that had to be made can be paid off.
This just makes sense, and has worked before.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490627</id>
	<title>So how does the current law apply to snail mail?</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1246028220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does the current law handle out of state sales that are ordered via snail mail? This should be no different to my way of thinking. Amazon has to 'live' somewhere and that state benefits from it (as it should). Just because a state can't attract a company to live in their state doesn't mean that all others outside of that state should be penalized for choosing some other state besides NC. Sucks to be small business owners there, but the is no different that "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".<br> <br>

If they don't like the local law, you don't do business there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does the current law handle out of state sales that are ordered via snail mail ?
This should be no different to my way of thinking .
Amazon has to 'live ' somewhere and that state benefits from it ( as it should ) .
Just because a state ca n't attract a company to live in their state does n't mean that all others outside of that state should be penalized for choosing some other state besides NC .
Sucks to be small business owners there , but the is no different that " We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone " .
If they do n't like the local law , you do n't do business there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does the current law handle out of state sales that are ordered via snail mail?
This should be no different to my way of thinking.
Amazon has to 'live' somewhere and that state benefits from it (as it should).
Just because a state can't attract a company to live in their state doesn't mean that all others outside of that state should be penalized for choosing some other state besides NC.
Sucks to be small business owners there, but the is no different that "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".
If they don't like the local law, you don't do business there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490335</id>
	<title>Re:The only way to make sure</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1246025340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>New York is sort of a special case because it is the home state of the NYSE (New York Stock Exchange) which would probably come under pressure from the famously aggressive New York Attorney General's office to "encourage" Amazon to pay the tax...or else. While the leverage of the State of New York is not unlimited, it probably is more powerful than what North Carolina can threaten Amazon with for non-compliance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>New York is sort of a special case because it is the home state of the NYSE ( New York Stock Exchange ) which would probably come under pressure from the famously aggressive New York Attorney General 's office to " encourage " Amazon to pay the tax...or else .
While the leverage of the State of New York is not unlimited , it probably is more powerful than what North Carolina can threaten Amazon with for non-compliance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New York is sort of a special case because it is the home state of the NYSE (New York Stock Exchange) which would probably come under pressure from the famously aggressive New York Attorney General's office to "encourage" Amazon to pay the tax...or else.
While the leverage of the State of New York is not unlimited, it probably is more powerful than what North Carolina can threaten Amazon with for non-compliance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491643</id>
	<title>Re:blindsided?</title>
	<author>demonlapin</author>
	<datestamp>1246038780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The more people that talk negatively about it, the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants.</p></div><p>Yeah, well, better hope that Philly never gets its shit together.  Look, North Jersey is just toast. It's only a matter of time.  I mean, go look at some of the hills that were being blown apart for aggregate (?!?!) in the 90s along 287.  But the farmland in South Jersey... yeah, it's nice stuff.  Same with the horse country along 206/202.  Couldn't stand the winters - I'm a Southerner - but the land is just beautiful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The more people that talk negatively about it , the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants.Yeah , well , better hope that Philly never gets its shit together .
Look , North Jersey is just toast .
It 's only a matter of time .
I mean , go look at some of the hills that were being blown apart for aggregate ( ? ! ? !
) in the 90s along 287 .
But the farmland in South Jersey... yeah , it 's nice stuff .
Same with the horse country along 206/202 .
Could n't stand the winters - I 'm a Southerner - but the land is just beautiful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more people that talk negatively about it, the better my chances of having beautiful rural NJ never overrun by midwestern suburban transplants.Yeah, well, better hope that Philly never gets its shit together.
Look, North Jersey is just toast.
It's only a matter of time.
I mean, go look at some of the hills that were being blown apart for aggregate (?!?!
) in the 90s along 287.
But the farmland in South Jersey... yeah, it's nice stuff.
Same with the horse country along 206/202.
Couldn't stand the winters - I'm a Southerner - but the land is just beautiful.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1246047420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is not the online retailers that are leaching, it is the people who buy from them and don't pay the tax themselves. Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country. I am surprised that Amazon didn't shut down all of their NY affiliates because NY has one of the most nightmarish sales tax setups for any retailer without a fixed location. "Yes, I know this is the Syracuse Convention Center, but it is not actually in the City of Syracuse, so the sales tax is 7.25\% not 7.5\%. You have been defrauding these people, even though you were going to pay all the tax you collected to the state of NY."</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is not the online retailers that are leaching , it is the people who buy from them and do n't pay the tax themselves .
Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country .
I am surprised that Amazon did n't shut down all of their NY affiliates because NY has one of the most nightmarish sales tax setups for any retailer without a fixed location .
" Yes , I know this is the Syracuse Convention Center , but it is not actually in the City of Syracuse , so the sales tax is 7.25 \ % not 7.5 \ % .
You have been defrauding these people , even though you were going to pay all the tax you collected to the state of NY .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is not the online retailers that are leaching, it is the people who buy from them and don't pay the tax themselves.
Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for a small online retailer if they had to figure out what sales tax to charge on every transaction in every locality in the country.
I am surprised that Amazon didn't shut down all of their NY affiliates because NY has one of the most nightmarish sales tax setups for any retailer without a fixed location.
"Yes, I know this is the Syracuse Convention Center, but it is not actually in the City of Syracuse, so the sales tax is 7.25\% not 7.5\%.
You have been defrauding these people, even though you were going to pay all the tax you collected to the state of NY.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486867</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246047960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are a certifiable idiot.</p><p>Please don't breed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are a certifiable idiot.Please do n't breed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are a certifiable idiot.Please don't breed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486515</id>
	<title>They Had Warning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246046220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Local affiliates say they were "blind-sided" by the company's action.</p></div><p>I'm sorry, sir, I normally restrict myself to civil language but you are so full of shit.  <br> <br>

I don't even live in North Carolina and recalled <a href="https://secure.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=107779" title="accountingweb.com" rel="nofollow">reading about 'warning' letters sent to you</a> [accountingweb.com].  Maybe you should open up your e-mails from June 17-18:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We regret to inform you that the North Carolina state legislature (the General Assembly) appears ready to enact an unconstitutional tax collection scheme that would leave Amazon.com little choice but to end its relationships with North Carolina-based Associates. You are receiving this e-mail because our records indicate that you are an Amazon Associate and resident of North Carolina.<br> <br>

Please note that this is not an immediate termination notice and you are still a valued participant in the Associates Program. All referral fees earned on qualified traffic will continue to be paid as planned.<br> <br>

But because the new law is drafted to go into effect once enacted -- which could happen in the next two weeks -- we will have to terminate the participation of all North Carolina residents in the Amazon Associates program on or before that same day. After the termination day, we will no longer pay any referral fees for customers referred to Amazon.com or Endless.com nor will we accept new applications for the Associates program from North Carolina residents.<br> <br>

The unfortunate consequences of this legislation on North Carolina residents like you were explained in detail to key senators and representatives in Raleigh, including the leadership of the Senate, House, and both chambers' finance committees. Other states, including Maryland, Minnesota, and Tennessee, considered nearly identical schemes, but rejected these proposals largely because of the adverse impact on their states' residents.<br> <br>

The North Carolina General Assembly's website is www.ncleg.net and additional information may be obtained from the Performance Marketing Alliance at www.performancemarketingalliance.com.
We thank you for being part of the Amazon Associates program, and we will apprise you of the General Assembly's action on this matter.<br> <br>

Sincerely,<br>
Amazon.com</p></div><p>You were warned!  Tell us, James Barrett, how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax?  <br> <br>

Yes, it came early.  But you were warned.  Unwittingly operating for one day could set Amazon back thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars.  They tried blocking it with litigation in New York and they lost.  Don't get made at them for playing it safe, you have no one to blame but your elected officials.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Local affiliates say they were " blind-sided " by the company 's action.I 'm sorry , sir , I normally restrict myself to civil language but you are so full of shit .
I do n't even live in North Carolina and recalled reading about 'warning ' letters sent to you [ accountingweb.com ] .
Maybe you should open up your e-mails from June 17-18 : We regret to inform you that the North Carolina state legislature ( the General Assembly ) appears ready to enact an unconstitutional tax collection scheme that would leave Amazon.com little choice but to end its relationships with North Carolina-based Associates .
You are receiving this e-mail because our records indicate that you are an Amazon Associate and resident of North Carolina .
Please note that this is not an immediate termination notice and you are still a valued participant in the Associates Program .
All referral fees earned on qualified traffic will continue to be paid as planned .
But because the new law is drafted to go into effect once enacted -- which could happen in the next two weeks -- we will have to terminate the participation of all North Carolina residents in the Amazon Associates program on or before that same day .
After the termination day , we will no longer pay any referral fees for customers referred to Amazon.com or Endless.com nor will we accept new applications for the Associates program from North Carolina residents .
The unfortunate consequences of this legislation on North Carolina residents like you were explained in detail to key senators and representatives in Raleigh , including the leadership of the Senate , House , and both chambers ' finance committees .
Other states , including Maryland , Minnesota , and Tennessee , considered nearly identical schemes , but rejected these proposals largely because of the adverse impact on their states ' residents .
The North Carolina General Assembly 's website is www.ncleg.net and additional information may be obtained from the Performance Marketing Alliance at www.performancemarketingalliance.com .
We thank you for being part of the Amazon Associates program , and we will apprise you of the General Assembly 's action on this matter .
Sincerely , Amazon.comYou were warned !
Tell us , James Barrett , how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax ?
Yes , it came early .
But you were warned .
Unwittingly operating for one day could set Amazon back thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars .
They tried blocking it with litigation in New York and they lost .
Do n't get made at them for playing it safe , you have no one to blame but your elected officials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Local affiliates say they were "blind-sided" by the company's action.I'm sorry, sir, I normally restrict myself to civil language but you are so full of shit.
I don't even live in North Carolina and recalled reading about 'warning' letters sent to you [accountingweb.com].
Maybe you should open up your e-mails from June 17-18:We regret to inform you that the North Carolina state legislature (the General Assembly) appears ready to enact an unconstitutional tax collection scheme that would leave Amazon.com little choice but to end its relationships with North Carolina-based Associates.
You are receiving this e-mail because our records indicate that you are an Amazon Associate and resident of North Carolina.
Please note that this is not an immediate termination notice and you are still a valued participant in the Associates Program.
All referral fees earned on qualified traffic will continue to be paid as planned.
But because the new law is drafted to go into effect once enacted -- which could happen in the next two weeks -- we will have to terminate the participation of all North Carolina residents in the Amazon Associates program on or before that same day.
After the termination day, we will no longer pay any referral fees for customers referred to Amazon.com or Endless.com nor will we accept new applications for the Associates program from North Carolina residents.
The unfortunate consequences of this legislation on North Carolina residents like you were explained in detail to key senators and representatives in Raleigh, including the leadership of the Senate, House, and both chambers' finance committees.
Other states, including Maryland, Minnesota, and Tennessee, considered nearly identical schemes, but rejected these proposals largely because of the adverse impact on their states' residents.
The North Carolina General Assembly's website is www.ncleg.net and additional information may be obtained from the Performance Marketing Alliance at www.performancemarketingalliance.com.
We thank you for being part of the Amazon Associates program, and we will apprise you of the General Assembly's action on this matter.
Sincerely,
Amazon.comYou were warned!
Tell us, James Barrett, how many letters did you sent to your representatives demanding they strike down this unconstitutional tax?
Yes, it came early.
But you were warned.
Unwittingly operating for one day could set Amazon back thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars.
They tried blocking it with litigation in New York and they lost.
Don't get made at them for playing it safe, you have no one to blame but your elected officials.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486875</id>
	<title>Moving from NC to NJ for tax reasons?</title>
	<author>geoffrobinson</author>
	<datestamp>1246048020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that would be a man bites dog story. As NJ residents, we should always have our eyes out for other tax jurisdictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that would be a man bites dog story .
As NJ residents , we should always have our eyes out for other tax jurisdictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that would be a man bites dog story.
As NJ residents, we should always have our eyes out for other tax jurisdictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489691</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246019220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon don't [collect sales tax].</p></div><p>http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=468512</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon do n't [ collect sales tax ] .http : //www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html ? nodeId = 468512</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NC businesses which sell to NC residents via Amazon don't [collect sales tax].http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=468512
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490029</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think it's a great tactic</title>
	<author>bigngamer92</author>
	<datestamp>1246021980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It reminds me of that article about Microsoft planning to leave the country if more corporate taxes are instated.  Of course Microsoft is already doing so and everyone is giving a resounding "meh".  Maybe if they chose to not ship Windows 7 to the US unless Corporate taxes went down.
</p><p>Of course this is Amazon which is an OK company to root for despite the kindle.  And it is outside NC's jurisdiction of taxation.  So what happens if there is a federal tax on the internet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It reminds me of that article about Microsoft planning to leave the country if more corporate taxes are instated .
Of course Microsoft is already doing so and everyone is giving a resounding " meh " .
Maybe if they chose to not ship Windows 7 to the US unless Corporate taxes went down .
Of course this is Amazon which is an OK company to root for despite the kindle .
And it is outside NC 's jurisdiction of taxation .
So what happens if there is a federal tax on the internet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It reminds me of that article about Microsoft planning to leave the country if more corporate taxes are instated.
Of course Microsoft is already doing so and everyone is giving a resounding "meh".
Maybe if they chose to not ship Windows 7 to the US unless Corporate taxes went down.
Of course this is Amazon which is an OK company to root for despite the kindle.
And it is outside NC's jurisdiction of taxation.
So what happens if there is a federal tax on the internet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495679</id>
	<title>Re:While your at it......</title>
	<author>TheoMurpse</author>
	<datestamp>1246125420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Smoking bans aren't made to protect patrons; they're made to protect the employees of the restaurant.</p><p>You may say "well, those employees can work elsewhere."</p><p>But then it sounds like you're arguing that there shouldn't be any OSHA regulations at all. Are you? Maybe you are, but then I think a lot of reasonable people would disagree with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Smoking bans are n't made to protect patrons ; they 're made to protect the employees of the restaurant.You may say " well , those employees can work elsewhere .
" But then it sounds like you 're arguing that there should n't be any OSHA regulations at all .
Are you ?
Maybe you are , but then I think a lot of reasonable people would disagree with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Smoking bans aren't made to protect patrons; they're made to protect the employees of the restaurant.You may say "well, those employees can work elsewhere.
"But then it sounds like you're arguing that there shouldn't be any OSHA regulations at all.
Are you?
Maybe you are, but then I think a lot of reasonable people would disagree with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489541</id>
	<title>Re:That's the real meaning of "voting with your fe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246017840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>what motives would cause governments...to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?</i></p><p>I don't know. Maybe an election? It could work...in theory</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what motives would cause governments...to deliver " good service " to the people at the lowest cost possible ? I do n't know .
Maybe an election ?
It could work...in theory</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what motives would cause governments...to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?I don't know.
Maybe an election?
It could work...in theory</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28496195</id>
	<title>Re:The only way to make sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246130460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You realize that you just admitted (or very nearly so) to tax evasion, right? You're still responsible for state sales tax from NewEgg, TigerDirect, Geeks, and everywhere else, but if there's no physical presence in your state it's <em>your</em> responsibility to remit it to the state rather than the retailer's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You realize that you just admitted ( or very nearly so ) to tax evasion , right ?
You 're still responsible for state sales tax from NewEgg , TigerDirect , Geeks , and everywhere else , but if there 's no physical presence in your state it 's your responsibility to remit it to the state rather than the retailer 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realize that you just admitted (or very nearly so) to tax evasion, right?
You're still responsible for state sales tax from NewEgg, TigerDirect, Geeks, and everywhere else, but if there's no physical presence in your state it's your responsibility to remit it to the state rather than the retailer's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489667</id>
	<title>NC is greedy state</title>
	<author>Foobar of Borg</author>
	<datestamp>1246019040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This comes as no surprise to those of us who have lived in North Carolina.  The state legislature is a money-grubbing sleezebag pile of shit that tries to screw over its citizens at every turn.  And, they provide next to nothing in services.  Basically, the tax rates of New England with the services of Alabama.  I'm glad I don't live there anymore!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This comes as no surprise to those of us who have lived in North Carolina .
The state legislature is a money-grubbing sleezebag pile of shit that tries to screw over its citizens at every turn .
And , they provide next to nothing in services .
Basically , the tax rates of New England with the services of Alabama .
I 'm glad I do n't live there anymore !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This comes as no surprise to those of us who have lived in North Carolina.
The state legislature is a money-grubbing sleezebag pile of shit that tries to screw over its citizens at every turn.
And, they provide next to nothing in services.
Basically, the tax rates of New England with the services of Alabama.
I'm glad I don't live there anymore!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488991</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246014300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It IS a mess, even with the Streamlined Sales Tax Initiative. Usually, the tax zones are per-zip and street. So no problems there. WA state even provides a webservice to help now, though I wrote a system at my last job to use their database, which updates quarterly.</p><p>Where it GETS fun is Texas. They don't have a online webservice. Their tax regions in NO WAY line up with streets/zip codes. Even the so-called 'Streamline Sales Tax' folks didn't want them to join unless they aligned their tax zones with zip/streets. How do you get a authoritative sales tax in Texas? Their suggestion is to call the county tax assessors office for each order!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It IS a mess , even with the Streamlined Sales Tax Initiative .
Usually , the tax zones are per-zip and street .
So no problems there .
WA state even provides a webservice to help now , though I wrote a system at my last job to use their database , which updates quarterly.Where it GETS fun is Texas .
They do n't have a online webservice .
Their tax regions in NO WAY line up with streets/zip codes .
Even the so-called 'Streamline Sales Tax ' folks did n't want them to join unless they aligned their tax zones with zip/streets .
How do you get a authoritative sales tax in Texas ?
Their suggestion is to call the county tax assessors office for each order !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It IS a mess, even with the Streamlined Sales Tax Initiative.
Usually, the tax zones are per-zip and street.
So no problems there.
WA state even provides a webservice to help now, though I wrote a system at my last job to use their database, which updates quarterly.Where it GETS fun is Texas.
They don't have a online webservice.
Their tax regions in NO WAY line up with streets/zip codes.
Even the so-called 'Streamline Sales Tax' folks didn't want them to join unless they aligned their tax zones with zip/streets.
How do you get a authoritative sales tax in Texas?
Their suggestion is to call the county tax assessors office for each order!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487455</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>raftpeople</author>
	<datestamp>1246006980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most companies use Vertex for this.  I've used them in sell to consumer systems since early 90's.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most companies use Vertex for this .
I 've used them in sell to consumer systems since early 90 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most companies use Vertex for this.
I've used them in sell to consumer systems since early 90's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487245</id>
	<title>Re:Are Online Retailers Going to Contribute or Not</title>
	<author>David Greene</author>
	<datestamp>1246049520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GIS works quite well for this kind of thing.  It wouldn't be hard to setup a database for this purpose (see comment above).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GIS works quite well for this kind of thing .
It would n't be hard to setup a database for this purpose ( see comment above ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GIS works quite well for this kind of thing.
It wouldn't be hard to setup a database for this purpose (see comment above).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487385
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487135
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28496195
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490651
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488905
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523627
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489691
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486875
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488467
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487587
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488589
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28524309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488397
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489473
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28503055
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490225
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487803
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488591
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487389
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495739
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_26_172248_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490317
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28524309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487295
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487839
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490273
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28503055
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488427
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489553
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490843
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488295
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494229
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494599
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487953
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488673
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490289
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489123
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488549
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489891
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489541
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490225
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488111
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490651
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489363
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488397
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489473
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486685
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28496195
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487803
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495679
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486875
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486977
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487585
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487423
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488649
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491599
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487333
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490209
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488589
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28491515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486861
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488737
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28494341
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488645
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488949
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488367
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28489691
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523457
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28490029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486725
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_26_172248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486801
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487315
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488809
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486755
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487135
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487175
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495725
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488869
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488467
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486759
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487215
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487677
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28523627
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487221
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488023
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28495739
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486857
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488761
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497101
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487587
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28486807
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488991
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488905
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487207
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28488591
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487403
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487245
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487217
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28497831
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_26_172248.28487455
</commentlist>
</conversation>
