To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 3768
3767  |  3769
Subject: 
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 17 Jan 2000 17:54:00 GMT
Reply-To: 
lpieniazek@novera{AvoidSpam}.com
Viewed: 
2317 times
  
Jasper Janssen wrote:

On Tue, 11 Jan 2000 15:19:55 GMT, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller)
wrote:

But that doesn't exactly reduce paper consumption. :)

Uh, no. The paperless office is a big myth.

The ease with which paper is created id one of the biggest problems of
our times, IMHO. Let printer ink and toner be taxed at an additional
$2.50 per page, I say. _THEN_ we'll see a paperless office.

Ah yes... slap a tax on it instead of trying to set things up to get at
the root costs, eh? Typical tax and spend thinking.

Why not go after lumber companies for causing erosion when they clear
cut, and charge the proper amount to dispose of waste, and all the other
actual costs at every step of the way instead.

A 2.50 a page tax is distorting because it's too simplistic. What if I
invent a paper that is produced from used household paper scraps. Should
I have to pay the same tax even though I have less impact on the
ecology? Or do we need some complex formula deciding that my paper is
partly exempt and partly not because it still takes electricity?

--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com  http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.

NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) Uh, Larry? I _was_ kidding. (...) So how do you figure the costs of erosion? TIhe lumber companies own their land, usually, after all. Or they have permission from the owners. And if the use that land to deposit the waste on, why shouldn't (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) How did you arrive at that number? That's my point. (24 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) But that doesn't exactly reduce paper consumption. :) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR