I got this link off of Alex's blog - and I'm seeeeeething.

Short story: A guy lives in Tennessee and works in NY (appears that he is there in person 1/4 of the time, and telecommutes 3/4 of the time). NY state is charging him income tax. The Supreme court refused to hear an appeal from this guy who's protesting having to pay these taxes.

I'm dumbfounded.

Someone answer this question: How does the guy in Tennessee, who is being charged taxes in NY, help determine how those tax dollars are spent? There is NO way he can influence the way those funds are dispensed, because he's not allowed to take part in any elections in NY. He is therefore TAXED and has no REPRESENTATION.

Put it another way: I don't give a crap if the guy lives in NJ, and commutes into NY every day. He shouldn't have to pay taxes to NY. Period. And don't give me that dumb line of "well, he IS using the roads and stuff in NY." Woop-de doo! Are you trying to tell me that NYers don't EVER drive into NJ?

Hell, think of all the cheap-skate tourists driving on your states' roads RIGHT-THIS-SECOND!!!!111. QUICK, let's figure out a way to tax them. Oh wait, they wouldn't be sufficiently represented to determine how those levied taxes should be spent. Fix the potholes? Paint new lines? Put in more bathrooms/rest-stops? Gee, they wouldn't be able to help determine how the money was spent. Pretty sure that exempts them from taxation.