swirl - 2:25 pm on May 8, 2006 (gmt 0)

Yet another Nickel & Dime job on the US people. (...) Sweeping these costs under the carpet is extremely under-hand IMHO.

Your sentiment is well taken, and it helps reinforce a basic business decision I made a number of years ago.

Maybe others here have had to wrestle with something similar to this...

At the time, I had the opportunity to involve myself and a part of my company in a tangental part the online adult entertainment industry.

I had severe moral reservations about the endeavor, even though the venture was entirely legal.

In the final analysis, I realized that there is scant evidence of a consistent application of "moral values" in government taxation and regulation. Therefore, why should I needlessly hobble my own business by steering clear of potentially immoral (although legal) business ventures?

I'm glad I made that decision. The U.S. is a nation of laws, with a diverse citizenship who have differing views on what is moral and ethical.

No doubt there will be people who would happily pay more in fees to fund widespread wiretapping of every communication any citizen makes regardless of circumstances so as to enhance their feelings of being "safe" in a dangerous world.

So yes, sweeping the costs of government imposed surveillance under the carpet is an underhanded, perhaps even unethical tactic. It possesses, however, the blessing of being legal, and so it will happen.