How the government is killing jobs
I read over at Confederate Yankee that Amazon.com is letting their North Carolina associates go:
According to Wikipedia, there are over 900,000 "Associates" working with Amazon. If legislation and regulation cause Amazon to let many of these affiliates go as they are doing in North Carolina, unemployment will only increase. My guess is what is happening with Amazon is happening to companies across the country-- regulation and regime uncertainty are causing companies and small businesses to get rid of, or not hire workers in the first place.
This becomes a vicious circle. Everyone will talk about how high unemployment is without understanding how the government is sinking jobs at a fast pace. There will be a demand for government intervention which will only further the problem. Until people realize that more government, regulation and taxes is not the solution, my guess is unemployment will rise.
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.
According to Wikipedia, there are over 900,000 "Associates" working with Amazon. If legislation and regulation cause Amazon to let many of these affiliates go as they are doing in North Carolina, unemployment will only increase. My guess is what is happening with Amazon is happening to companies across the country-- regulation and regime uncertainty are causing companies and small businesses to get rid of, or not hire workers in the first place.
This becomes a vicious circle. Everyone will talk about how high unemployment is without understanding how the government is sinking jobs at a fast pace. There will be a demand for government intervention which will only further the problem. Until people realize that more government, regulation and taxes is not the solution, my guess is unemployment will rise.
posted by Helen at 7:08 AM
13 Comments:
The implicit assumption in tax increases is that it is unreasonable to demand that governments reorganize themselves or cut services. Most of that has to do with the left, which is almost never critical of how government actually functions. I've rarely ever seen a liberal who gets genuinely upset at inefficient government since it is a terrible burden on the community. Invariably, what they do is say that we aren't spending enough or they hem and haw about everything but the actual problem. I invite anyone who disagrees with that characterization to point out the last time that a liberal politician, in righteous indignation, drafted a bill to abolish a dysfunctional bureaucracy.
I don't understand this post. The quote says that the N.C leg is illegally enacting laws and by so doing, am,azon is cutting their associates in that state. Perhaps illegal laws ought not be passed or enacted. Why blame the govt for what is done by the state as though it is the fault of our govt?
In myt state Amazon is increasing jobs.
There is also an efficient process for taxing ecommerce, but it would never be implemented because it would only allow the states a more effective means of taxing their own citizens, rather than out of state businesses.
fred,
How can you possibly not understand the point of this post? The North Carolina state government is the government in question, and it is destroying business in that state with this policy.
I think that fred's point is that if states are passing laws that are actually illegal - by that I assume he means unconstitutional - then we have bigger problems than the destruction of jobs and businesses by state policies.
Pure speculation: The associates program (whatever that is) has been a miserable failure and the NC legislature just gave Amazon.com perfect political cover to get rid of the thing.
Joe,
The NC legislature is trying to collect sales tax on any item purchased via the internet if that item was sold through a North Carolina-based business. They are redefining all of the Amazon associates as North Carolina-based if the business owner resides in North Carolina. Amazon would be (at least partially) responsible for collecting state sales tax for NC.
North Carolina already makes me pay them sales tax for any item purchased online (I am an NC resident). Now they want all NC based businesses that sell online to charge sales tax no matter where the purchaser lives.
So if you live in a state that charges sales tax on online purchases and the item you purchased comes from an NC-based Amazon associate, you'd be paying sales tax to two states, your state and North Carolina.
Amazon wants nothing to do with it. They may be the only one with the power to push back and stop this idiotic attempt by our govt.
Currently, Amazon collects New York sales tax from me when I order, though I'm not sure if they're yet handing it over to the state government. I think they're hedging their bets while pursing legal avenues to resist.
It would be nice to get my sales tax back, but you know what? If I had to choose between New York getting it or a private enterprise just outright keeping it, I'd rather let Amazon have it. They can put it towards the legal bills they're accruing in trying to resist this shakedown.
Correction: Just read up a bit more on the legislation and what it does.
Amazon associates are typically people that are paid a referral from Amazon when visitors click through to Amazon from their sites. The sites may be nothing more than blogs, they don't have to be sites selling anything.
The legislature is claiming that through this process, Amazon has a sales presence (nexus) in this state (because the associate lives here) and thus must charge sales tax.
Several states (including Tennessee) have similar laws in various stages of consideration. The Performance marketing Alliance has some good information about the situation.
http://www.performancemarketingalliance.com/anti-affiliate-legislation/
I don't know why anyone would get upset. The development of solar and wind power allows taxation of sunshine and the air we breathe. The government has been trying to figure out how to do that for a long time.
" [T]axation of sunshine and the air we breathe."
I was ready to start laughing, but thankfully caught myself. I'm afraid that this will turn out to be all too true.
Insightful!
This is off topic, but for the first time, I tried to force myself to sit through an entire showing of "Bill Maher Real Time" on HBO last night. He had Chris Matthews, the current head of the NAACP and the female ex-head or uppity - up of Homeland Security on as guests.
Their perception of the right, and of themselves, is nothing short of mind boggling. If they believe what they say, then liberalism is indeed a mental disorder, as I have heard (read) others say.
It is my understanding the show repeats once or twice in a cycle, so it should be available for viewing again, although I have no idea where in its cycle this particular showing was.
Long and short, I sat through about two minutes of it and could watch no more. The audience was 100% in lock step with them (where do they find these people?)hanging on every word, and screeching, roaring and applauding loudly with every ridiculous thing said. The more ridiculous a statement was, the more the audience roared their approval. I can only imagine the studio is full of applause signs hanging from the ceiling.
After thinking it through, I am going to try to catch this show again (this particular showing) and will force myself to watch it in its entirety. I have ignored the left since Reagan days, as they have nothing for me and I simply don't subscribe to that way of thinking. Big mistake on my part. I need to understand the left. If half our nation actually believes what these people were discussing and passing as fact, we are in deeper do-do than I ever imagined.
North Carolina has a long history of idiotic and illegal taxes. They once tried to levy an "intangibles tax" which taxed you on the value of stocks you owned. Not the dividend income, not any gains, but the actual value. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and was overturned.
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1239
Post a Comment
<< Home