First it was like, "Woah." Then it was like, 'Woah!". And then it was like, "Woahhhh..."

Take a look at this juicy piece of flavah. Wicked bad statism!

http://www.eagletribune.com/punewsnh/local_story_035025425.html?keyword=topstory

Now, there are a few things to consider here. First, the contract clause of the US Constitution prohibits a state gubment from interfering in private contract (if taken logically, this would even prohibit internal taxes on sales in all states, but hey, who cares about logic?) Second, the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution could be used here, in a way that actually FITS the proper understanding of the clause. Why? Because the MA gubment would, in effect, be imposing a tariff on the purchase by MA citizens of out-of-state goods. That's a no-no based on the Conssa-tution!

But in addition to those observations, one should take this into consideration:

MA politicians want to not only gain tax cash, they want to "protect MA businesses" from the "unfair" out-of-state competitors (you know, the ones who AREN'T coerced to cough up as much tax money to their gubments when they make sales). Many people can recognize how absurd and evil it is to try to stop people from crossing a state border to buy a TV or tires. They say, "Hey, let someone get something for less! Let him buy what he WANTS! Let him be free to go to NH and get a carton of cigarettes if he wants, or a radio or computer! He'll have more money left over to spend on some stupid thing in Mass, or to feed his kids or go on a vacation, or whatever he pleases. It will end up HELPING the economy because the standards of living of people will improve without them having to spend as much of their efforts in getting the things they want to improve them!"

So, why can't these same people apply their thoughts opposing the MA tax on the purchase of out-of-state goods to the federal taxes we pay for buying foreign-made goods?

Ask around, and see how people hesitate when you ask them to answer.

Be Seeing You!