I recently read an interesting artical
HERE regarding proposed increases in the contributions by tech companies of all types that create communication equiptment to the Universal Service Fund (USF).
The argument being presented is that everything from VoIP companies to DSL and cable companies should have to pay into this fund as the internet is a form of communication.
Different lawmakers are suggesting different approaches (Pls read the artical for a broader understanding), but intent seems to be the same accross the board. That being to increase the amount of companies that are taxed to subsidize telephone access for lower income groups and telecommunications access for library's, schools, etc.
The artical focuses in part on increasing contributions to the fund for the purpose of extending internet access to rural or sparse areas.
A disproportiant amount of the lawmakers mentioned in the artical had (R) next their name. This lead to much thought on my part.
I was always told that republicans where a party for lower / lesser taxes and less government interfearence. Isn't this interfearing with the market in many ways?
It seems to be the worst of big government. The combination of larger taxes tacked onto an entitlement program that forces others to subsidize costs for rural areas?
Would it not be better to allow the market to decide if internet service is offered in a rural area? If there is not profit to be made, there are no companies that are going to offer a service. Why force such a money losing proposition on everyone?
It seems to be a tax grab and a "gimmee" moment by more rural states for tax dollars that are not needed and increase the cost to both consumers and technology companies to do business.