<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Europe looking to tax EMail&#8217;s and SMS messages</title>
	<atom:link href="http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:23:43 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: hoodoo</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194770</link>
		<dc:creator>hoodoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2006 00:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194770</guid>
		<description>Again, the USPS never &quot;tried to tax emails&quot; dumbass.  Check your facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Again, the USPS never &#8220;tried to tax emails&#8221; dumbass.  Check your facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ClaMs</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194476</link>
		<dc:creator>ClaMs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 07:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194476</guid>
		<description>It won&#039;t pass. The restriction (minor or not) of such telecomunications would be a drastic blow to the EU&#039;s telecomunication progress, and let alone public relations. Having an icrease of 1.5c would almost make our SMSes 50% more costly, meaning we&#039;d start sending 33% less messages - God forbid.

This would even mean that certain sites would remove the &#039;email to friend&#039; function.

Anyway surely people would find a way around it. Maybe a sort of emailing system that uses a different protocol to POP3 or whatever we use. IM clients would certainly become more popular. 

What if I have a virus and it keeps sending false emails off my computer? Would I have to pay for those? What about emailing from a website such as gmail or yahoo and not Outlook? How can they track those? What if the site is American? Surely the EU can&#039;t charge me for using a service from the US!

Tracking all those emails would certainly cost more then the revenue they bring in:

&quot;Sir, I&#039;ve managed to capture 100,000 emails that were going to by pass our system!&quot;                           
&quot;Good job lad! That means the EU is 1c richer thanks to you! Here&#039;s your paycheck!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It won&#8217;t pass. The restriction (minor or not) of such telecomunications would be a drastic blow to the EU&#8217;s telecomunication progress, and let alone public relations. Having an icrease of 1.5c would almost make our SMSes 50% more costly, meaning we&#8217;d start sending 33% less messages &#8211; God forbid.</p>
<p>This would even mean that certain sites would remove the &#8216;email to friend&#8217; function.</p>
<p>Anyway surely people would find a way around it. Maybe a sort of emailing system that uses a different protocol to POP3 or whatever we use. IM clients would certainly become more popular. </p>
<p>What if I have a virus and it keeps sending false emails off my computer? Would I have to pay for those? What about emailing from a website such as gmail or yahoo and not Outlook? How can they track those? What if the site is American? Surely the EU can&#8217;t charge me for using a service from the US!</p>
<p>Tracking all those emails would certainly cost more then the revenue they bring in:</p>
<p>&#8220;Sir, I&#8217;ve managed to capture 100,000 emails that were going to by pass our system!&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Good job lad! That means the EU is 1c richer thanks to you! Here&#8217;s your paycheck!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194454</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 06:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194454</guid>
		<description>Isnt taxed supposed to be based off some sort of use that the government provides? How is this anything they provide? This is why when the USPS tried to tax emails they failed, because they contribute nothing to the service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isnt taxed supposed to be based off some sort of use that the government provides? How is this anything they provide? This is why when the USPS tried to tax emails they failed, because they contribute nothing to the service.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194414</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 03:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194414</guid>
		<description>The way I see it, the government is researching ways to collect money [taxes] from us. They&#039;ll first pass this tax because it&#039;s soooo low, but I&#039;m sure they&#039;ll start raising the tax until we [the users] complain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way I see it, the government is researching ways to collect money [taxes] from us. They&#8217;ll first pass this tax because it&#8217;s soooo low, but I&#8217;m sure they&#8217;ll start raising the tax until we [the users] complain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ClaMs</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194368</link>
		<dc:creator>ClaMs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 01:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194368</guid>
		<description>Na I doubt this would hold any ground. First of all there&#039;s a law which prohibits the taxation on communiations such as satelites and ariels.

Secondly, there&#039;s the French, and they don&#039;t take shit from anybody. Surely they&#039;ll put a stop to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Na I doubt this would hold any ground. First of all there&#8217;s a law which prohibits the taxation on communiations such as satelites and ariels.</p>
<p>Secondly, there&#8217;s the French, and they don&#8217;t take shit from anybody. Surely they&#8217;ll put a stop to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hoodoo</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194347</link>
		<dc:creator>hoodoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194347</guid>
		<description>Anyone ever hear of an urban legend?  It seems like only yesterday when the USPS had to issue a press release denying that they were enacting this &quot;tax.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone ever hear of an urban legend?  It seems like only yesterday when the USPS had to issue a press release denying that they were enacting this &#8220;tax.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194235</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 17:42:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194235</guid>
		<description>Why does everything bad happen to us Europeans?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why does everything bad happen to us Europeans?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josh</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/comment-page-1/#comment-194230</link>
		<dc:creator>josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 16:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uneasysilence.com/archive/2006/05/6499/#comment-194230</guid>
		<description>i bet the sender pays the bill. they&#039;ll probably have some sort of id number attached to emails that flow through special servers or get tracked by isp&#039;s and the records get handed over.

in the lifespan of my gmail acct i have racked up 1,181 emails over the past couple of years. that only amonts to $0.01181 cents. taxing emails hardly sound effective for  raising money. the tax would have to be $0.02 cents ($23.62 over 2 years) or something.

the whole idea sound shi**y to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i bet the sender pays the bill. they&#8217;ll probably have some sort of id number attached to emails that flow through special servers or get tracked by isp&#8217;s and the records get handed over.</p>
<p>in the lifespan of my gmail acct i have racked up 1,181 emails over the past couple of years. that only amonts to $0.01181 cents. taxing emails hardly sound effective for  raising money. the tax would have to be $0.02 cents ($23.62 over 2 years) or something.</p>
<p>the whole idea sound shi**y to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
