Desktop

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Congress Soon Reconvenes . . .

0 helpful
22 replies

by john connell 2 views

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

January promises to be an interesting month in Washington. Congress prepares to reconvene and the President-Elect will get behind the wheel. I am curious about what kinds of IT issues TechRepublic members want to see addressed by the new administration.

One issue that comes to my mind is the tax guidelines and depreciation rules regarding IT equipment. I've heard some people complain that a lot of hardware ends up obsolete before it can be written off. Does anyone think that the dynamics of the industry merit reevaluation of the current depreciation rules?

What else should they be considering in Washington?

22 replies

by mcorr

The first is relaxing the "national defense" restrictions on encryption technology. Anything publicly available here is easy for the "undesireables" to acquire: simply fly over and get it.

Another is the Microsoftopoly. GWB has not commented directly on this, but he has a strong lassez-faire streak and may call off Boies (?!?) and the lawsuit.

Another issues is increased technology devices in classrooms and training for teachers to ensure the next generation of TechRepublic members :)

by h_celeste

Not to start a fight here, but Bill Gates donates more computer equipment to schools than the federal government. If getting more technology in the classroom is a priority--and I agree that it should be--maybe looking to private sector donors like Gates is the most effective way to achieve that goal.

As for W.'s hands off policies--all the better! I want political leadership that will keep the net free from censor-happy fundamentalists and sales tax seekers.

by pjstrifas

Good for him! He should be applauded for it but he should not given a "pass" when his company has been found "guilty" of anit-competitive practices!

As for hands off - I'll agree the break-up is useless and will not do any good but does this meanwe should not be "watching" over EVERY company shaping the future of our world?

Isn't that what happened in the 1930's in Europe as people turned a "blind eye"?

Just adding my opinion, not to starting a fight :)

by joel.g.altman1

>Bill Gates donates more computer equipment
>to schools than the federal government.

It doesn't have to be this way. The federal government just replaced my perfectly good 266 Mhz Pentium I with a 730 Mhz Pentium III. The new machine is much faster, but the old machine was fine for keeping track of my time and e-mail. It would do the same for the average school. In fact, it's over kill.

by donna.kennedy

We have to go through to many channels to get Govt PCs donated to schools, waiting periods, etc. We need to change the way we donate to streamline the process and get this equipment out to the schools before it gets so outdated. ECO, Eglin AFB

by mcorr

Private sector donations always have been the source of most charity in this country. I was not saying W's government should take over this role, only that he should use his power to encourage more computers in schools. This can be done by tax breaks, public pressure, use of the media, etc.

I think the net should be tax free also, but then I think all sales should be tax free. What you don't realize is that the internet is *NOT* tax free now. Some states require you to report online sales on your return and pay taxes on these items at that time.

by packratt

Actually I'm hesitant to have government get involved in anything, let alone IT. Whenever the government steps in it's bad news for everyone because we can see how government is able to screw up anything else it does. If government solutions only applied a little common sense it wouldn't be an issue. Also, the corruptability factor concerns me as well since the laws seem to support those who give the most money to the lobbyists and campaigns.

The Microsoft issue is a non-issue in my mind since it would not affect the people who actuall own and run MS itself. What's the difference between a monopoly and a duopoly that does not compete with each other directly.

IT labor issues are my biggest concern as an IT employee though, but I don't think there is anything promising there since the ITAA has a stranglehold on the government's ear and the IT workforce has yet to organize enough to counter them and the industry itself.

Oh well, happy new year.

by suzie_q

>If government solutions only applied a >little common sense it wouldn't be an issue

Packratt you know there is no DLL between government and "common sense". And I do not see the current administration doing anything to aleviate that situation.

Being from Texas I am well acquainted with W and I can assure you that he has no interest in the IT industry. Keep a close eye on his appointments though, they will be the movers and shakers in his administration and he will take the credit for others work as he has always done.

Tom

by patton777

How about the new administraton jumping on the AOL TIME Warner merger. And then looking at Sun micro-systems. I mean hell, Clinton's Justice Department has and is trying to bust up Microsoft for being a monopoly, maybe Bush should take a look at AOL, Time, and Sun. Microsoft lawyers have been saying for almost two years that these companies were the only plaintiffs in the lawsuite...maybe they weren't lying!!!

by mcorr

I will agree with you that AOL/TIME/Warner might constitute a monopoly, but how in the world is Sun a monopoly?

by patton777

Among other things AOL is the largest OSP/ISP in the country maybe the world, Time Warner is pretty high up on the "we control the mass media" list...with that in mind let's forget about "might be".
Sun may not be a monopoly as of now but they andtheir CEO are the most powerful litigents in this Microsoft Suit. Sun claims that Microsoft's bussiness practices are less then honorable. I didn't realize that one company could press an issue or in this case "laws" that were designed to protect consumers not competing companies. Oh yeah, the ceo from Sun, the head of the DOJ, and AOL's CEO are all good Pals. Rumor has it that these guys are dinner buddies. Go figure! OH YEAH the stock market implies that SUN stocks have been on the upswing since the Microsoft suite!!!

by tim.downey

This is one topic I am finally willing to allow the govt to do something about. I have always been against any govt intervention on the Internet, but It is time to find a way to STOP SPAM e-mail. Since I don't think the govt can regulate the sending of or the content of e-mail, maybe if we made it necessary to get my authorization to sell or give my personal data (including my e-mail address) to any other entity it would cut down on the ridiculous number of e-mails I get each day.

I am getting weary with Spam and I believe this is the least possible govt intervention that would actually do something positive.

by mcorr

I think you misunderstand the basis of the lawsuit against Microsoft. The problem is not that their business practices are not honorable or that they are the largest seller: It is that they use their de-facto total control of the PC desktop to prevent competing software from being used and hardware vendors from using another OS.

As for AOL being a monopoly, they are not even close. They may be the largest, but they do not have overwhelming control of the industry and have not (as far asI know) used their position as industry leader to eliminate all oposition. Time/Warner might be, but the mass media cartel is a different beast entirely. More of an oligarcy than a monopoly.

by patton777

Not to disagree but lets take a look at the antitrust laws. The advent of these laws were to protect the consumer against things like price gouging, and sub standard products. The idea of the antitrust is to protect consumers that's all. The, as youput it "de Facto Control" can be explained like this. If Coke taste better then Pepsi and people buy more Coke then Pepsi, should Pepsi be able to get an injunction so that Coke has to add a can of Pepsi in each of their six packs? I think not. Or maybe Pepsi feels that the way Coke places their cans in the little plastic carriers is the reason that Coke taste better and why more people buy Coke. So Pepsi should ask a court to control the way coke places their cans in the plastic carriers. Thissounds really stupid but read the case breifs on the Microsoft site. It's the same thing on a larger scale. If the consumer, the consumer, the consumer is not harmed then there is no foul. What right does AOL or Sun have to pressure the DOJ to antitrust suites if the consumer is who the laws were designed to protect. I, like millions of other PC users and IT pros love and need Microsoft. The DOJ is messing with my livleyhood without my consent...and that sir is unconstitutional.

Bush needs to call the dogs off of Microsoft or go after the whole lot of these companies.

Let's look at the next batch of monopolies. AOL and TW merged this week, next month AOL and TW merge with Sun or another OS designer and then what do you have...ding, ding, ding another monopoly with more resources and technical power then MS could dream of. This whole rotten case smells foul inside and out! You would have to be a fool not to see this coming.

by smysnbrg

I think the IT priority of the new administration should be to work to strenghten our nation's infrastructure and its use of information technology.

Our geographical isolation has given us citizens a sense of security that gradually becomes jeapordized by the constant inroduction of new technology.

Cyber-terrorism is becoming increasingly inevitable and everything from complex satelite communications to citizen information databases are at risk.

Our country should work together to use its own human resources to create stronger and more stable systems...

by john connell

Bush met with several technology executives to hear their concerns. He's already claimed that he will sustain a moratorium on Internet sales taxes.

He's appointing a Chief Technology Officer to beef up Internet security measures.

Here's an interesting factor to mull over: Microsoft executives contributed substantially to the Republican campaign. Anyone care to forecast the progression of the MS Anti-trust matter?

by david_hastings

Of course he'll look out for the big contributers. Why do you think he and his cronies won't touch campaign finance reform?

by packratt

The corrupt dogs in government have done enough harm already and I would be perftectly happy if they didn't accomplish a darn thing in the next four years or more, (which looks like a good possibility with the split in congress and a moron for pres).

Great, I'm happy to hear that the executives that push the real techies to their limits of endurance while coniving to keep them from getting benefits by making them temps and by planning to replace us all with cheap exploited labor from overseas with false claims of a shortage are getting into Bush's ear with their well paid bribes, oops, I mean contributions.

Hey, it might be great for the IT companies and great for the executives, but anything government does is bad news for the techies.

As for MS... It doesn't matter, Bush will do what they want him to and it doesn't matter if they split or not because it won't hurt the executives like Gates and Ballmer since they'll still run a duopoly if split or a monopoly if not. They will still have and earn more money than they know what to do with and they will still have a say no matter how many times the company is split.

Happy new year!

by gravesm28

Most of you would probably be inclinded to beleive that I'm going to address free speach, well I'm not. I'm going to address e-mail as a means of legal documentation.

I travel frequently overseas and often my e-mail is the only timely coorespondence I have available to me. Although it save incredible amounts of time, there are limitations. I can't send a secure e-mail to resolve legal issues without snail-mail.

When you live in an electronic world and this world enables you to send a message around the world in just moments but have to wait two weeks to send a change of address, it is very frustrating.

Wouldn't you agree???

by joepage

The AMT is a tax for trying to get rich people writing off tons of income to pay a minimum amount on all of it.
A couple of HUGE problems come from this tax however...

The first example is soon to be a big problem for large and low-income families. An approximate example would be if a family of 7 or 8 that made $30,000 per year gets write-offs that bring their taxable income down to $15,000, and would normally pay the smallest tax percentage on that amount. The AMT comes into play here and says that the family must pay at least 26% on the $30,000.

My example of AMT abuse comes from being the first employee at .com e-tail pioneer Value America. I received A LOT of incentive stock options, and the company took off in 1998-9 like many .coms. The point at which I exercised (bought) 520,000 of my vested options, I paid $0.58 a share and the stock was worth about $15 per share ($74 a week later!!!) The "profit" ($15 - $0.58 = $14.42 per share) is not standard taxable income to the IRS, but it is subject to AMT. Therefore, since AMT tax at that level is 28%, I owed $2.1M in tax after taking out a LOAN for $250K to exercise shares. Value America then proceeded to tumble into oblivion. Through a combination of bad advice, and being too honest and ignorant to sell my shares when I had knowledge of negative insider information, I sold no shares. However, the IRS still says that I owe $2.1M on a "profit" of negative $250K.

This is obviously not the hottest issue out there, but it has to be a BIG issue for a decent amount of .com victims, and I believe it will become the "prescription drug" issue by the next election as the number of lower-income victims grow.

by shanghai sam

If you live 60+ miles from a downtown business district, then you probably suffer very slow Internet connectivity. The cause of this bottleneck seems to be the old, outdated equipment used by local telephone companies.
Let us lobby together as a nation, and demand that telephone company monopolies be forced to upgrade their physical plants, which we are forced to use for our Internet connectivity.
It is time for the telephone companies to join the communications age, and live up to the bandwidth needs of the twenty-first century.

by jalbert_rcdd

If you live 60+ miles from a downtown business district, then you probably suffer very slow Internet connectivity. The cause of this bottleneck seems to be the old, outdated equipment used by local telephone companies.
Let us lobby together as a nation, and demand that telephone company monopolies be forced to upgrade their physical plants, which we are forced to use for our Internet connectivity.
It is time for the telephone companies to join the communications age, and live up to the bandwidth needs of the twenty-first century.

This discussion is closed to new replies.