Who can tax a satellite?

[Reese]

At 09:57 PM 7/11/01, Tim May wrote:
 >At 8:31 PM -1000 7/11/01, Reese wrote:
 >
 >>I doubt it, or it would already be a dead issue.
 >
 >Sure. Things happen instantaneously. Oz is all powerful.

Not what I meant and you know, or should know it.

 >>>For several decades the U.S. (and presumably Russia/FSU) has
 >>>convinced the nations of the world that fees need not be paid to
 >>>India, Botswana, and Shakedownistan just because U.S. satellites pass
 >>>overhead. If L.A. is able to shake down Hughes for some tax to be
 >>>distributed to the welfare bums and crack hoes, then Botswana and
 >>>Shakedownistan will be next in line.
 >>
 >>They aren't talking about rotating satellites though, they are talking
 >>about geostationary ones, ones that hover over CA,
 >
 >None of them hover _over_ CA. Physically impossible. The Clarke Belt
 >is well-defined. Look into it.

Your quibble is noted, you didn't even address the middle clause.

 >>  or are property that
 >>is administered from CA - not quite the same thing as passing overhead,
 >>or every airline would end up owing to every nation and state it flies
 >>over _for the act of flying over_ also.
 >
 >News flash to Reese: Airlines DO make payments or other
 >considerations to nations they fly over.

Do they also land in those countries they make payments to, pick up and
drop passengers off?  Or are you saying "Zed Airlines" that has no offices
and makes no stops in "Zilch" but flies over it, makes payments to it?

One real world example of such.

 >Jeesh. Every summer brings the return of "Reese" and "Petro."

I nub you too.  Do the letters "F O" mean anything to you?

Reese