Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   News: Conservatives finally find a tax they like. Fark: A tax on porn. Ultrafark: It would come in the form of a filter that would be added to computers, and phones that would block obscene material until you pay a $20 fee   ( huffingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Murica, Pornography, Pornography addiction, porn production company, Human Trafficking Prevention, porn addiction, poorly executed studies, Sen. Todd Weiler, Anti-pornography movement  
•       •       •

2065 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2017 at 1:03 PM (26 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



209 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-04-21 12:16:15 PM  
The workaround that disables it for free to appear within ten minutes of it going online, courtesy of an army of angry, porn-deprived webchanners.
 
2017-04-21 12:16:40 PM  
If this doesn't get republican voters pissed off, I don't know what will.  What the fark is next? A video game tax?
 
2017-04-21 12:17:14 PM  
Free Dumb
Free Dumb
Free Dumb
 
2017-04-21 12:17:26 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 12:17:35 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 12:18:38 PM  
projectmadeline.files.wordpress.com
 
2017-04-21 12:20:37 PM  
It's not just a tax, it seems like a regulation on the PC and smart phone industry to develop and install this software and potentially the cost of meeting changing standards for the filter as workarounds are developed. The same aholes who whine about the burden of fuel efficiency standards that provide a measurable common good by reducing oil consumption want regulations and taxes for a dubious end. And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?
 
2017-04-21 12:26:22 PM  
They sure are obsessed with sex and vaginas and teh ghey stuff.
 
2017-04-21 12:29:37 PM  

SMALL GOVERNMENT CONSERVATISM

 
2017-04-21 12:31:26 PM  

kbronsito: And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?


The point is that you will have to opt-in to pay and get the filter removed.  Which means you have to stand up and give your name and say, "Why yes, I would like my name on a list in Jeff Sessions' office that says I watch porn."

I wonder how many people want their name and picture taken by the local paper when they go to the local whore house.
 
2017-04-21 12:32:55 PM  
Too bad you can't tax stupid, the republicans could wipe out the national debt all by themselves.
 
2017-04-21 12:39:06 PM  
Jokes on them, I can just go back to masturbating to National Geographic and anatomy textbooks like when I was in Middle School.

Also, who wants to be that the filter would block sites that use the term "food porn?"
 
2017-04-21 12:39:46 PM  
Is this not enough for you Yanks to drag these monsters from their positions of power and subject them to the mob justice they so richly deserve?
 
2017-04-21 12:42:12 PM  

wejash: kbronsito: And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?

The point is that you will have to opt-in to pay and get the filter removed.  Which means you have to stand up and give your name and say, "Why yes, I would like my name on a list in Jeff Sessions' office that says I watch porn."

I wonder how many people want their name and picture taken by the local paper when they go to the local whore house.


They already have that data on the NSA servers.

Taxing vice is as American as apple pie. Our first tax was on whisky for that reason. It was also structured so that large producers could pay a flat tax and small-scale farkers paid by the liter produced (because screwing the poor by carefully structuring taxes is also as American as apple pie).
 
2017-04-21 12:48:45 PM  

kbronsito: wejash: kbronsito: And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?

The point is that you will have to opt-in to pay and get the filter removed.  Which means you have to stand up and give your name and say, "Why yes, I would like my name on a list in Jeff Sessions' office that says I watch porn."

I wonder how many people want their name and picture taken by the local paper when they go to the local whore house.

They already have that data on the NSA servers.

Taxing vice is as American as apple pie. Our first tax was on whisky for that reason. It was also structured so that large producers could pay a flat tax and small-scale farkers paid by the liter produced (because screwing the poor by carefully structuring taxes is also as American as apple pie).


Oh FFS, yes, right. The NSA knows all.  (Of course we have already seen how complicated it will get if they actually tried to use the NSA data for anything other than discreetly checking up on the neighbor's kinks.)

But that's not the point.

The point is SHAMING.

This is not a policy to raise money.  This is not a policy to tax sin.

This is Church Lady Politics.  It's political theatre to make the Christian Taliban happy.

media.giphy.com
 
2017-04-21 12:54:04 PM  

wejash: This is not a policy to tax sin.


Yes, it is.

That's why it makes the Christian Taliban happy.
 
2017-04-21 01:02:43 PM  
Who determines what is considered porn?
 
2017-04-21 01:05:20 PM  
From my COLD. DEAD. HANDS.
 
2017-04-21 01:05:30 PM  
Interesting concept. Sure, you can have freedom of speech, but you can't have freedom to listen to that speech..
 
2017-04-21 01:06:20 PM  

Shostie: Who determines what is considered porn?


Same group of people who got to decide a shoulder thing that goes up makes a weapon an assault weapon.
 
2017-04-21 01:06:28 PM  

Archidude: From my COLD. DEAD. HANDS.


That's my fetish!
 
2017-04-21 01:06:41 PM  
This would immediately turn the state of Utah from red to blue.
 
2017-04-21 01:06:46 PM  

nmrsnr: Jokes on them, I can just go back to masturbating to National Geographic and anatomy textbooks like when I was in Middle School.

Also, who wants to be that the filter would block sites that use the term "food porn?"


Try it right now. There's no going back. We need multimedia
 
2017-04-21 01:07:51 PM  
All this means is that nerds would get some extra cash helping their non-techie friends get around the what is sure to be stupidly designed filter.

Didn't Australia try this only to have it fail stupidly?
 
2017-04-21 01:07:53 PM  

real_headhoncho: Is this not enough for you Yanks to drag these monsters from their positions of power and subject them to the mob justice they so richly deserve?


Let you guys did when your politicians outlawed facesitting?
 
2017-04-21 01:08:11 PM  

deadsanta: Archidude: From my COLD. DEAD. HANDS.

That's my fetishia


that'll cost you $20.
 
2017-04-21 01:08:32 PM  
This is going to be yet another V-Chip fiasco.
 
2017-04-21 01:09:32 PM  

nmrsnr: Jokes on them, I can just go back to masturbating to National Geographic and anatomy textbooks like when I was in Middle School.

Also, who wants to be that the filter would block sites that use the term "food porn?"


And former Congressperson Dick Armey.
 
2017-04-21 01:09:34 PM  
And you all laughed when I said I downloaded my favorite videos to an external drive and still had a collection of DVDs I picked up in the '00s.
WELL WHO'S LAUGHING NOW!?
 
2017-04-21 01:09:56 PM  

bloobeary: The workaround that disables it for free to appear within ten minutes of it going online, courtesy of an army of angry, porn-deprived webchanners.


Well, yeah, isn't it monumentally obvious that this won't work?  Which, of course, means that the legislator proposing it is a stupid idiot with stupid idiots on his staff who should have stopped him from being so stupid publicly.
 
2017-04-21 01:10:28 PM  
People get live porn completely unregulated by any standing law via chat apps. They're going to charge everyone that uses facebook and twitter?

GOOD LUCK
 
2017-04-21 01:10:42 PM  
cdn.meme.am
 
2017-04-21 01:11:21 PM  
John Van Dyke: If our children can buy pornography on any street corner for five dollars, isn't that too high a price to pay for free speech?
President Josiah Bartlet: No.
John Van Dyke: Really?
President Josiah Bartlet: On the other hand, I think that five dollars is too high a price to pay for pornography.
 
2017-04-21 01:12:42 PM  

Ambivalence: If this doesn't get republican voters pissed off, I don't know what will.  What the fark is next? A video game tax?


nah, republicans will think this will only target the porn they don't approve of...you know like interracial cuckold porn and gay porn (but oddly not lesbian porn).

Bubbling is back!!  (would post an example but at work for the moment)
 
2017-04-21 01:12:59 PM  

Shostie: Who determines what is considered porn?


My days of visiting asspartywithshostie.com are at an end.
 
2017-04-21 01:13:01 PM  
They're just trying to bring back the adult store industry.
 
2017-04-21 01:13:02 PM  
Actually I am all for it. This will only affect those dumb enough to not circumvent it.
 
2017-04-21 01:13:09 PM  

Shostie: Who determines what is considered porn?


img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 01:13:17 PM  

Archidude: From my COLD MOIST. DEAD STICKY. HANDS.

 
2017-04-21 01:13:19 PM  

I Have A Bo Burnham GIF For That: [img.fark.net image 320x240]


Well...apparently you do.
 
2017-04-21 01:13:39 PM  
The Internet is for porn avenue Q original song
Youtube rByGEPPJfYA
 
2017-04-21 01:13:44 PM  
Most of us jerk off to interracial anal gangbang porn involving pregnant albino midgets.  Jeff Sessions jerks off to the thought of restricting the rights of Americans.
 
2017-04-21 01:13:44 PM  

kbronsito: It's not just a tax, it seems like a regulation on the PC and smart phone industry to develop and install this software and potentially the cost of meeting changing standards for the filter as workarounds are developed. The same aholes who whine about the burden of fuel efficiency standards that provide a measurable common good by reducing oil consumption want regulations and taxes for a dubious end. And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?


so what two regulations are they getting rid of to add this one?

/Another Trump promise broken?
 
2017-04-21 01:14:07 PM  
Patiently waiting...
img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 01:14:54 PM  

Hyjamon: kbronsito: It's not just a tax, it seems like a regulation on the PC and smart phone industry to develop and install this software and potentially the cost of meeting changing standards for the filter as workarounds are developed. The same aholes who whine about the burden of fuel efficiency standards that provide a measurable common good by reducing oil consumption want regulations and taxes for a dubious end. And, isn't it easier to just tax the porn makers and distributors of its a matter of taxing vice?

so what two regulations are they getting rid of to add this one?

/Another Trump promise broken?


Environmental regulations, because those are so harmful to Americans
 
2017-04-21 01:14:55 PM  

Hyjamon: Ambivalence: If this doesn't get republican voters pissed off, I don't know what will.  What the fark is next? A video game tax?

nah, republicans will think this will only target the porn they don't approve of...you know like interracial cuckold porn and gay porn (but oddly not lesbian porn).

Bubbling is back!!  (would post an example but at work for the moment)


By "don't approve of" you meant "watch massive amounts of", right?
 
2017-04-21 01:15:14 PM  

I Have A Bo Burnham GIF For That: [img.fark.net image 320x240]


img.fark.net
 
2017-04-21 01:15:20 PM  
I have decades of Playboys, come at me bro.
 
2017-04-21 01:15:38 PM  
I'm not a big fan of the Sharia law that the GOP is trying to put in place.
 
2017-04-21 01:15:56 PM  
The American Taliban.
 
Displayed 50 of 209 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report