To: dirtboy
"but we CAN institute controls on governmental databases and analytical tools that use this data (the guns). So IMO the best approach is to worry less about the minuitae of the data (where the feds can bury data-gathering mechanisms deep in legislation where only the most masochistic wonks can find them) and instead concentrate on review of the databases, which are much larger projects that sooner or later appear on the political radar screens."
In general, I agree with your approach. But, there is a continuing problem with keeping legislators from passing things that bypass ideals. I'm not a libertarian, by any stretch of the imagination, but I do notice an increasing lack of privacy when it comes to the government. Industry as well, of course, but I'm less alarmed about getting more junk mail than I am about having to explain why I withdrew $10k in cash from my savings account.
Just yesterday, I had a visit from a nice man from the CA Board of Equalization, the sales tax folks. While he opted not to do an audit of my business, since there was little chance of recovering any unpaid sales taxes, he did take away with him a couple of mandatory forms, wherein I was compelled to provide account numbers for my business bank accounts, along with my merchant bank account number.
Now, I have no doubt at all that the state of CA can access every sale I make, given that almost all my sales are paid for by credit card.
No audit. That's nice. They wouldn't have found anything, anyhow, because I keep detailed, accurate records and don't hide any sales, cash or otherwise.
My point here is that we have certain principles in the USA, as outlined in our Constitution. The 4th and 5th Amendments come to mind here. However, our rights to privacy from governmental snooping are far from as strong as they once were.
Events like 9/11 are triggers which let our legislators remove little pieces of privacy, in the name of national security. I don't have a lot of confidence that this process is going to slow down.
I see a lot of comments about what might happen under a Democratic administration should some of the measures under consideration be implemented. I'm worried about _all_ administrations, to be quite frank. John Ashcroft doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me when it comes to privacy issues.
To: MineralMan
he did take away with him a couple of mandatory forms, wherein I was compelled to provide account numbers for my business bank accounts, along with my merchant bank account number. IMO tax collection efforts are a far greater threat to privacy than the national security proposals. I think TIA will be doomed by both the incredible scale of the project and the sheer ineptness of government systems development - seriously, the Pentagon can't even keep track of their civilian contractors, to whom they issue checks, and they think they can run TIA? But tax collection efforts are continually expanding the information they gather and the intrusiveness of their efforts.
41 posted on
04/11/2003 12:39:39 PM PDT by
dirtboy
(United States 2, Terror-sponsoring regimes 0, waiting to see who's next in the bracket)
To: MineralMan
It isn't just business where the tax collectors are getting too nosy. I moved to a rural township in Pennsylvania last year - and within a week I had a questionnaire in my mailbox (lord knows how they found out I was newly in the township) asking, among other things, my occupation and where I had moved from. PA has an occupation tax that is only charged by a few townships, and townships that levy an income tax cannot collect occupation tax. Since the township where I live collects income tax, I called up the collector and told her that she didn't need to gather that information. She said I had to provide it. I said I wasn't going to provide it because the township legally couldn't collect the tax in the first place. And I told her I wasn't providing information as to where I moved from, and she said I didn't have to provide that - had she insisted, I would have asked her to cite the PA Code that authorized her to gather the info.
A lot of this battle is standing up to these creeps where you can.
43 posted on
04/11/2003 12:55:06 PM PDT by
dirtboy
(United States 2, Terror-sponsoring regimes 0, waiting to see who's next in the bracket)
To: MineralMan
Your #40 is well put.
I'll go one step further. It's none of the CA's effen business how much you sell. America was never supposed to be a nation where some slimebag tax bureaucrat can look up a private person/business owner's ass any time he feels like it, just because he can.
It's too bad our citizens have become so compliant and weak that they continue to allow such activities to continue.
44 posted on
04/11/2003 1:14:53 PM PDT by
AAABEST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson