New Mexico Wants To Tax Your Games
Okay, so basically, don't move to New Mexico. Not because they're trying to tax televisions and videogames, since the idea is unlikely to come to pass, but because such a concept was even considered viable in the first place.
The Environmental Alliance of New Mexico is trying again to convince the state to levy a one-percent sales tax on televisions and videogames in order to fund outdoor education programs. They estimate that it could raise approximately $4 million a year, and Michael Casaus, the New Mexico youth representative of the Sierra Club insists, "We believe it is such a nominal tax that consumers won't feel it too much, especially if they are educated about where that money goes."
Right. Well, I'm glad to see that they're lumping TV in with videogames as what their "studies" have shown to cause lower grades, obesity and increased ADD. But they really need to come up with a better name for their movement than "Leave No Child Inside." And just because you educate the kids about nature and the outdoors doesn't mean that they're necessarily going to want to spend any time there. My guess is they're still going to want to play games. Good luck with that tax, though. Hey, maybe you should add comic books, too!
A Tax To Remember [The Huffington Post]
[via GamePolitics]
Wootini
Posted to Video Games on 23 January 2008
· Comments (6)
Other stuff like this: environment, government, new mexico, sierra club, tax
I, however, think this is a wonderful idea; a mere one percent tax on what are already luxury goods will in no way discourage consumers from their typical patterns, and the tax money thus taken in will be put towards a good cause. I don't see how this could really be considered a *bad* idea; while video games are fun, and I know I certainly spent a fair share of time playing them as a child, spending time outdoors, whether it be playing sports, basking in the sun, or just reading under a tree, provides a different range of stimuli/experience than can be gleaned through television or video games.
I don't think the issue is one of villainizing video games or television (although it does remain a sad fact that video games are a medium continue to be poorly understood by many) as it is one of ensuring/enabling a proper balance of experience. For all the potential positives of video games or television, an overreliance on certain forms of interacting or interfacing with the world is essentially limiting, I would argue. Video games can open the doors of the imagination, but that imagination can only be fully applied after the controller has been put down.
I, however, think this is a wonderful idea; a mere one percent tax on what are already luxury goods will in no way discourage consumers from their typical patterns, and the tax money thus taken in will be put towards a good cause. I don't see how this could really be considered a *bad* idea; while video games are fun, and I know I certainly spent a fair share of time playing them as a child, spending time outdoors, whether it be playing sports, basking in the sun, or just reading under a tree, provides a different range of stimuli/experience than can be gleaned through television or video games.
I don't think the issue is one of villainizing video games or television (although it does remain a sad fact that video games are a medium continue to be poorly understood by many) as it is one of ensuring/enabling a proper balance of experience. For all the potential positives of video games or television, an overreliance on certain forms of interacting or interfacing with the world is essentially limiting, I would argue. Video games can open the doors of the imagination, but that imagination can only be fully applied after the controller has been put down.
Sorry about the double-post -- the Internet hiccuped on me.
I think it's a great SENTIMENT to try and fund outdoor programs, however, I think they're trying to pull money from the wrong areas. Honestly, I think it would bring more cross boarder sales and weaken the NM economy.
I agree with Atolm. I don't regret spending much of my free time back then in front of the TV. But even though I wasn't a slouch, putting 50c a game towards being just one day a week more outdoors would've made a great impact. If a neglible amount of money translates into 400 new soccer pitches and b-ball courts, who are we to argue, really?
I REALLY doubt that a 1% tax would cause cross-boarder sales that would have any significant impact on NM's economy. A $50 game would cost 50 cents more. I don't think that would cause anyone to drive to another state or Mexico to purchase a game (you would spend more money getting there than you would save avoiding the tax).
That being said, the overall program sounds ok to me, but I would need more information about the actual types of education that it will fund before I give it my approval or dismissal.