Zammana, please look at the link so you know the story and then reply. This isn't about "virtual" anything. Amazon has real buildings all over the state. They're made of cement, glass, etc. They have employees. It's a corporation trying to evade taxes and trying to manipulate citizens into thinking it's about something else.

Thus isn't a new tax. This isn't a tax increase. It's about applying existing law fairly so that independent businesses are not screwed by the world's largest online retailer. And who are the "One Worlder Masters" you refer to that control the the U.S.? Are they not global corporations that own the Republicans and Democrats and shed their taxes on working people and small business?

Just curious: this thread started out with good discussion yesterday. Today it's totally taken over by anti-government rants that don't address the issue. Why is that? I'll repeat what I started with and welcome any serious debate: Amazon.com has facilities all over the state of California. While it has thus far gotten away with evading tax collection by creating " subsidiaries" (100% Amazon-owned) for many pieces of its business, business owners all over the state are victimized by an effective 10% subsidy going to Amazon. I hate sales taxes, but it's far worse to apply them in a way that victimizes store owners than apply them to every retailer. Here's one good starting point for learning the facts: http://bit.ly/amazonnexus

Bert, I don't see your logic. The advantage of storefront businesses is a market advantage, the sales tax discrepancy is a state-imposed handicap for brick and mortar stores. The two are not comparable or offsetting.

Bob, By definition, the new law has no direct impact on legitimate businesses within California--the harm comes entirely from Amazon dumping its affiliates as a bullying tactic (affiliates take note: many other companies are lined up to offer you similar commissions for referred sales). Because Amazon unquestionably has a physical presence via its operation in six cities, the dumping of affiliates is pure theater, indicating clearly Amazon cares nothing about the businesses that have been sending it customers for years.

There is so much wrong with this brief article, I don't know where to start. Amazon.com has facilities all over the state of California. While it has thus far gotten away with evading tax collection by creating " subsidiaries" (100% Amazon-owned) for many pieces of its business, business owners all over the state are victimized by an effective 10% subsidy going to Amazon. I hate sales taxes, but it's far worse to apply them in a way that victimizes store owners than apply them to every retailer. Here's one good starting point for learning the facts (from the American Independent Business Alliance): http://www.amiba.net/resources/news-archive/amazon-nexus-subsidiaries

When speaking with pro-abortion people of a more extreme bent, I sometimes run into the argument that while the unborn child is a separate being, even a separate human being, it is akin to a parasite. Like a tick, or even like a murderer attacking a woman, it can be killed without remorse. At that point I usually stop engaging in debate with the person, since I consider this to be the abortion debate's version of Godwin's Law.

7,000,000,000 dollars avoided Cisco_Swiss_Alps subsidiary with only 100 employees www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-28/biggest-tax-avoiders-win-most-gaming-1-trillion-u-s-tax-break.html

It's when they spackle all the holes. Silly.

To people like V.R., who have no personal experience with "those people," ignorant collective stereotypes will always serve. Historically, applying these to contentious societies has always resulted in understanding, clarity, and brotherhood -- why stop now?