The site:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20000112_xcbtl_americas_f.shtml
The article:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
America's first
tax on writers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you imagine what Thomas Jefferson would have thought if the British insisted on the right to tax the work of writers like himself, Thomas Paine, James Madison and other colonists?
How would our forefathers have reacted if the British crown had said tax collectors had a duty to inspect the homes and files of those writers -- even to the point of examining unfinished draft manuscripts and notes?
What would they have done if the king ordered all writers to register and keep him informed of what type of writing they were doing?
I'll tell you what. The American Revolution would have started a lot sooner. There is no way the colonists would have tolerated such a violation of basic human rights. This would have been a grievance that topped the list.
That's why it is so amazing, shocking and disappointing that such a law could actually be in place today in a major American city. It illustrates just how far Americans have gone down the slippery slope toward tyranny. And the fact that it has not been reported as a major national story by the self-interested U.S. media establishment is indicative of an increasingly statist trend in the press.
Where is such a law in place in America today? Sit down, folks. You're not going to believe this. It's Los Angeles -- a city where waiter-screenwriters are becoming as common as waitress-actresses. An ordinance in America's second largest city imposes a business tax on writers who work at home, a special business license fee and forced audits and home inspections.
I'm not kidding.
What's worse, a state appeals court, which ought to know better even if city officials have lost sight of the First Amendment, recently refused to block the tax and said writers would have to delay their constitutional challenges until they paid up or were sued for non-payment.
In a 3-0 ruling, the Second District Court of Appeal declined to consider whether the tax violated the basic right to free expression, saying only that the suit was premature. Unbelievably, the appeals court upheld an earlier ruling by Superior Court Judge Stephen Czuleger, who dismissed the suit.
What's going on in California? Is it still part of America?
Deciding the issues at this time violates "the strong public policy requiring a taxpayer to pay the tax and sue for a refund," said the opinion by Robert Mallano, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge temporarily assigned to the appeals court.
"The strong public policy requiring a taxpayer to pay the tax and sue for a refund." Uh-huh. I see what you mean. That certainly is a higher moral calling than the basic right to free expression. After all, government has first dibs on the people's money. The onus is on people to prove they don't owe the government and sue to get their money back. We all understand that basic concept of American civics. If that wasn't the case, who would ever pay their taxes?
Do you believe this stuff? It gets wackier and wackier.
Furthermore, this tax has been enforced on writers working at home since 1997. They are taxed a percentage of their income earned at home and a business license fee of $100.
The ill-fated suit against it was filed by the Writers Guild of America and six individual writers, including Lucian Truscott, a novelist and descendant of Thomas Jefferson.
They argued, quite rightly, that home inspections and audits authorized by the ordinance would bring city officials into writers' homes to examine their drafts and computer files and decide how much of a revenue-producing work was done in the city. The suit charged that the ordinance lacks clear standards and threatens to let the city suppress critical or unpopular expression.
Think about it. Matt Drudge lives in Los Angeles. Some of our reporters and columnists live in Los Angeles. Other journalists based there are writing about issues as sensitive as local police corruption. Knowing what we know about the character and civic integrity of public officials in Los Angeles -- the people who crafted such a law and are enforcing it -- is it such a stretch to imagine this law being abused to punish on the basis of content?
Gary Bostwick, a lawyer for the writers, doesn't think so. A major problem with the law, he says, is that it requires writers to register and tell the city what type of writing they are doing before challenging the tax. That right there poses problems for journalists and other writers whose work is sensitive, controversial and, by nature, confidential.
Simply incredible. If Americans will accept this, what won't they accept?
Jefferson, Madison and Paine must be rolling over in their graves.
[/quote]
Maybe this will have some very fortunate unintended consequences...
------------------
John/az
"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited January 12, 2000).]
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20000112_xcbtl_americas_f.shtml
The article:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
America's first
tax on writers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you imagine what Thomas Jefferson would have thought if the British insisted on the right to tax the work of writers like himself, Thomas Paine, James Madison and other colonists?
How would our forefathers have reacted if the British crown had said tax collectors had a duty to inspect the homes and files of those writers -- even to the point of examining unfinished draft manuscripts and notes?
What would they have done if the king ordered all writers to register and keep him informed of what type of writing they were doing?
I'll tell you what. The American Revolution would have started a lot sooner. There is no way the colonists would have tolerated such a violation of basic human rights. This would have been a grievance that topped the list.
That's why it is so amazing, shocking and disappointing that such a law could actually be in place today in a major American city. It illustrates just how far Americans have gone down the slippery slope toward tyranny. And the fact that it has not been reported as a major national story by the self-interested U.S. media establishment is indicative of an increasingly statist trend in the press.
Where is such a law in place in America today? Sit down, folks. You're not going to believe this. It's Los Angeles -- a city where waiter-screenwriters are becoming as common as waitress-actresses. An ordinance in America's second largest city imposes a business tax on writers who work at home, a special business license fee and forced audits and home inspections.
I'm not kidding.
What's worse, a state appeals court, which ought to know better even if city officials have lost sight of the First Amendment, recently refused to block the tax and said writers would have to delay their constitutional challenges until they paid up or were sued for non-payment.
In a 3-0 ruling, the Second District Court of Appeal declined to consider whether the tax violated the basic right to free expression, saying only that the suit was premature. Unbelievably, the appeals court upheld an earlier ruling by Superior Court Judge Stephen Czuleger, who dismissed the suit.
What's going on in California? Is it still part of America?
Deciding the issues at this time violates "the strong public policy requiring a taxpayer to pay the tax and sue for a refund," said the opinion by Robert Mallano, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge temporarily assigned to the appeals court.
"The strong public policy requiring a taxpayer to pay the tax and sue for a refund." Uh-huh. I see what you mean. That certainly is a higher moral calling than the basic right to free expression. After all, government has first dibs on the people's money. The onus is on people to prove they don't owe the government and sue to get their money back. We all understand that basic concept of American civics. If that wasn't the case, who would ever pay their taxes?
Do you believe this stuff? It gets wackier and wackier.
Furthermore, this tax has been enforced on writers working at home since 1997. They are taxed a percentage of their income earned at home and a business license fee of $100.
The ill-fated suit against it was filed by the Writers Guild of America and six individual writers, including Lucian Truscott, a novelist and descendant of Thomas Jefferson.
They argued, quite rightly, that home inspections and audits authorized by the ordinance would bring city officials into writers' homes to examine their drafts and computer files and decide how much of a revenue-producing work was done in the city. The suit charged that the ordinance lacks clear standards and threatens to let the city suppress critical or unpopular expression.
Think about it. Matt Drudge lives in Los Angeles. Some of our reporters and columnists live in Los Angeles. Other journalists based there are writing about issues as sensitive as local police corruption. Knowing what we know about the character and civic integrity of public officials in Los Angeles -- the people who crafted such a law and are enforcing it -- is it such a stretch to imagine this law being abused to punish on the basis of content?
Gary Bostwick, a lawyer for the writers, doesn't think so. A major problem with the law, he says, is that it requires writers to register and tell the city what type of writing they are doing before challenging the tax. That right there poses problems for journalists and other writers whose work is sensitive, controversial and, by nature, confidential.
Simply incredible. If Americans will accept this, what won't they accept?
Jefferson, Madison and Paine must be rolling over in their graves.
[/quote]
Maybe this will have some very fortunate unintended consequences...
------------------
John/az
"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited January 12, 2000).]
