PA Republicans propose "sin tax" on video games.

[Flame]

It'd be a great way to encourage even more pirating.

 

[Shadow Link]

Taxes can have one or 2 purposes....
1) Generate revenue.
2) Discourage an activity.

#1 is always there.
#2 is there for things like booze, smokes, video games, ammunition.

Moreover, #1 is sometimes used by one group's taxing authority to tax
an outside group, eg, hotel tax. This strikes me as unabashed fleecing.

It's like a Catch-22 where government needs revenue to keep the sheep from going astray, except many sheeple like government because they don't fully understand what it takes to achieve individual liberty. And our current efforts are simply taxation.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's like a Catch-22 where government needs revenue to keep the sheep from going astray, except many sheeple like government because they don't fully understand what it takes to achieve individual liberty. And our current efforts are simply taxation.

Clearly, not much rational thought goes into taxation.

 

[Shaul]

Violent Video Game Tax Proposed In Pennsylvania

Thoughts?

Yeah, I think the report you cited is quite misleading. From your citation it says the 2018 version of the bill was introduced by a Republican. But that version never even made it out of committee. The 2019 bill is 1) different and 2) was introduced by two Democrats and one Republican. Not really a Republican concept. That there are a few rogue Republicans isn’t news. Democrats have theirs too.

Here is another report on this,
Lawmakers Call for Tax on Violent Video Games in Pa.

 

[Shadow Link]

Clearly, not much rational thought goes into taxation.

Taxation never cuts at the root of a problem, it merely trims toward a growing one(inflation). Most taxes are equivalent to Can kicking solutions.

 

[Skwim]

.

In as much as

"The money would go into a fund called the "Digital Protection for School Safety Account" that aims to enhance security measures at schools in the wake of the school shootings in Parkland, Florida and Newtown, Connecticut." ​

I think the money should come from an excise tax on guns and ammunition.

.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So much for the idea of "read my lips." "No new taxes?" They seem to love taxes.

Heh. How about a trade? The Republicans video game tax for the Democrats cigarette tax. Guess which one is higher?

To be fair I think the Republicans are insane with this ridiculous tax. Remind me never to move to PA.

Clearly, not much rational thought goes into taxation.

Rarely ever does.

 

[Revoltingest]

Taxation never cuts at the root of a problem, it merely trims toward a growing one(inflation). Most taxes are equivalent to Can kicking solutions.

Aside from being inadequate to cover spending,
they build in some dysfunctional incentives.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Heh. How about a trade? The Republicans video game tax for the Democrats cigarette tax. Guess which one is higher?

Even Republicans love cigarette taxes. Under Mitch Daniels (R), Indiana increased them to help fund health care (maybe specifically children's, but I don't remember).

 

[Father Heathen]

I like it.

Well go on. Tell us why.

 

[Stevicus]

Clearly, not much rational thought goes into taxation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

To be serious for just a little bit, it is demonstrable that smoking is not only hazardous for one's own health, but for the health of the people that are around them. The price of cigarettes alone does not cover that cost. Taxation is not only just, but increasing taxation can also be a deterrent of a proven negative. That is hardly the case with video games. It is recreation.. It does not have the same causal relationship of harm. Punitive taxation of them, even if one does not play them, should be opposed. I have no problem with the same sales tax that other products have being placed on them. It is not the government's job to say "I do not like this particular form of recreation that is largely harmless (anything can be abused, I am ignoring the extremes) so I will tax Billy for his game.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Well go on. Tell us why.

Buy my first book and find out yourself.

Here's a paragraph for free:
"As for the violent, while they may stop the worst crimes, they increase mid-hooliganism like bullying. Sensitivity to growing-up experiences may diminish. robbing the player of good, wholesome memories in life. The American Psychological Association is 117,500 strong and has a statement that there is a link 'between violent video game use and both increases in aggressive behavior and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy, and moral engagement.'"

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To be serious for just a little bit, it is demonstrable that smoking is not only hazardous for one's own health, but for the health of the people that are around them. The price of cigarettes alone does not cover that cost. Taxation is not only just, but increasing taxation can also be a deterrent of a proven negative. That is hardly the case with video games. It is recreation.. It does not have the same causal relationship of harm. Punitive taxation of them, even if one does not play them, should be opposed. I have no problem with the same sales tax that other products have being placed on them. It is not the government's job to say "I do not like this particular form of recreation that is largely harmless (anything can be abused, I am ignoring the extremes) so I will tax Billy for his game.

Really, it just seems video games replaced rock 'n roll as the social scapegoat.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"As for the violent, while they may stop the worst crimes, they increase mid-hooliganism like bullying. Sensitivity to growing-up experiences may diminish. robbing the player of good, wholesome memories in life. The American Psychological Association is 117,500 strong and has a statement that there is a link 'between violent video game use and both increases in aggressive behavior and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy, and moral engagement.'"

They've been saying that, but it's never translated to results outside of a lab, and it cannot explain why America has such high crime rates but not Canada, Sweden, or Japan (who all also love video games, including violent ones). Also, there are studies that have shown positive benefits of violent video games for certain demographs (such as those with a terminal illness).

 

[robocop (actually)]

They've been saying that, but it's never translated to results outside of a lab, and it cannot explain why America has such high crime rates but not Canada, Sweden, or Japan (who all also love video games, including violent ones).

A lab is sufficient. If you had read my post more clearly you would have discovered that I said it stops the worst crimes. It increases mid-level behavioral problems like bullying. So the International data fits with the lab.

My apologies that I don't really want to talk to you Shadow Wolf but thank you. I'm sorry... I just don't think you're a very good influence for me.

 

[Father Heathen]

Buy my first book and find out yourself.

No thanks.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

A lab is sufficient. If you had read my post more clearly you would have discovered that I said it stops the worst crimes. It increases mid-level behavioral problems like bullying. So the International data fits with the lab.

Even a psych 101 class will say that results found in a lab that aren't found in the real world are questionable, and will emphasis that as a short coming of doing lab research for psychology. I've even had teachers who have been a part of some of those studies, and even they question if they behaviors seen in a lab and if it will actually predict aggressive behavior in the real world. And when we look abroad, there is no basis for an assumption that violent video games produce violent behavior or bullying.

 

[Revoltingest]

To be serious for just a little bit, it is demonstrable that smoking is not only hazardous for one's own health, but for the health of the people that are around them. The price of cigarettes alone does not cover that cost. Taxation is not only just, but increasing taxation can also be a deterrent of a proven negative. That is hardly the case with video games. It is recreation.. It does not have the same causal relationship of harm. Punitive taxation of them, even if one does not play them, should be opposed. I have no problem with the same sales tax that other products have being placed on them. It is not the government's job to say "I do not like this particular form of recreation that is largely harmless (anything can be abused, I am ignoring the extremes) so I will tax Billy for his game.

Under a single payer system, smoking might actually
save society money because they die earlier in life.
(This assumes 2nd hand smoke danger is prevented.)
Ref....
Smokers and the obese cheaper to care for, study shows
LONDON — Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it does not save money, according to a new report.
It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.
"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."
In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.
Van Baal and colleagues created a model to simulate lifetime health costs for three groups of 1,000 people: the "healthy-living" group (thin and nonsmoking), obese people, and smokers. The model relied on "cost of illness" data and disease prevalence in the Netherlands in 2003.
The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

 

[Duke_Leto]

This is perhaps totally off-topic but one theoretical physicist
suggesting taxing all electronic devices as a way of funding
advanced research into electronics.
We tax alcohol, some places tax prostitution, why not tax
violence too? It might help support law enforcement in the
same way we could help physics research.

Right, because law enforcement is surely a branch of government that needs more funding. [/sarcasm]