"I'm GGG and I approve this message."

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I am not defending him. As I said dozens of times, I would not engage in the most aggressive tactics some of these people have. I am merely citing a cultural trend toward supporting them. And I am blaming this crumbling of public "morality" about tax cheating on the fans of big govt who think they can engage in wars and pay for bloated entitlement programs on the taxpayers' back and then have the gall to act as though people who tell them to fuck off and refuse to pay their taxes are somehow "immoral."

They should vote differently and change things. They are immoral, like Leona Helmsley and other people who feel the rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to them. You can't only pay taxes for the stuff you want, and I'm sure Wesley et. al. (incl. you) would not like it if the parts of gov't that don't benefit them (uh, you) disappeared along with the parts they don't approve of.

ETA and you are too defending him, and I can almost kind of hear you defending one of your frat brothers for rape in the way wanker described.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
They should vote differently and change things. They are immoral, like Leona Helmsley and other people who feel the rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to them. You can't only pay taxes for the stuff you want, and I'm sure Wesley et. al. (incl. you) would not like it if the parts of gov't that don't benefit them (uh, you) disappeared along with the parts they don't approve of.

ETA and you are too defending him, and I can almost kind of hear you defending one of your frat brothers for rape in the way wanker described.

perhaps one of the "don't" in your last sentence is a typo? many poster find running a draft through some spell-checking elements helps their posts improve. I do not think such a procedure would catch this mistake. I must say, it is most unlike you to commit such an error. RUOK?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by taxwonk
It's already a serious problem. The tax gap is billions of dollars. And your argument that the govenrment is flawed, therefore all citizens are entitled to ignore the law is troublesome on a number of levels.

I assume you're just jacking with me. I can't believe that you're really as amoral as you are claiming to be for purposes of this discussion.

There is no moral position in regard to taxes. It's a necessarily amoral subject.

Philosophically, however, why shouldn't a tax cheat enjoy the benefits of his risk? Every gain is a risk premium, right? So, if one takes the chance and pulls it off, isn't there an argument to be made that he effectively played the market/game/whatever and deserves the spoils?

I pay my taxes because I don't want to wind up in an annoying audit or penalty proceeding. If I knew I could get away without paying them with no risk, I would not pay taxes. I don't know whether that makes me moral, amoral or immoral, but I do know this - I've got lots of company in that thinking.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
There is no moral position in regard to taxes. It's a necessarily amoral subject.

Philosophically, however, why shouldn't a tax cheat enjoy the benefits of his risk? Every gain is a risk premium, right? So, if one takes the chance and pulls it off, isn't there an argument to be made that he effectively played the market/game/whatever and deserves the spoils?

I pay my taxes because I don't want to wind up in an annoying audit or penalty proceeding. If I knew I could get away without paying them with no risk, I would not pay taxes. I don't know whether that makes me moral, amoral or immoral, but I do know this - I've got lots of company in that thinking.

unless you're built like a gorilla and can sword fight you would be killed in the lawless primative conditions that would exist if not for the formation of government. since most of us at least enjoy the benefit of some level of protection from the g. you have a moral duty to pay your taxes.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
They should vote differently and change things. They are immoral, like Leona Helmsley and other people who feel the rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to them. You can't only pay taxes for the stuff you want, and I'm sure Wesley et. al. (incl. you) would not like it if the parts of gov't that don't benefit them (uh, you) disappeared along with the parts they don't approve of.

ETA and you are too defending him, and I can almost kind of hear you defending one of your frat brothers for rape in the way wanker described.

The rape analogy is offensive. Your trite accusation that I'd defend a person in that circumstance actually contradicts history.* I don't need to explain how imbecillic both of you sound making that analogy. You're embarrassing yourselves trying to cheaply grab the high road with that rhetorical gimmick.

They are not immoral. They are breaking the law. Those are two wildly different concepts.

*An individual was accused of being a bit agreesive and threatening to a woman and I voted to have him thrown out, immediately.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
perhaps one of the "don't" in your last sentence is a typo? many poster find running a draft through some spell-checking elements helps their posts improve. I do not think such a procedure would catch this mistake. I must say, it is most unlike you to commit such an error. RUOK?

yes, the second don't in the last sentence of the original post was an ooopsie.

If I were not, what would you do?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The rape analogy is offensive. Your trite accusation that I'd defend a person in that circumstance actually contradicts history. I don't need to explain how imbecillic both of you sound making that analogy. You're embarrassing yourselves trying to cheaply grab the high road with that rhetorical gimmick.

They are not immoral. They are breaking the law. Those are two wildly different concepts.

They are both, in my book. BOTH.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
yes, the second don't in the last sentence of the original post was an ooopsie.

If I were not, what would you do?

in the past, i might have tried to cheer you up by amusing you with a harsh attack on some ill-fated poster, but truly that would be wrong of me to do that, and wrong of you to be amused at the poor soul's pain. so now all I can do is wish you well and hope you improve against whatever may be troubling you.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
They are both, in my book. BOTH.

OK. In my book they're law breakers. Nothing more, nothing less.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb

ETA and you are too defending him, and I can almost kind of hear you defending one of your frat brothers for rape in the way wanker described.

I know you were a little hot when you wrote this, but this kind of annoys me. You know that's not the sort of person I am from years of posting here. Why would you suggest that?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
ETA and you are too defending him, and I can almost kind of hear you defending one of your frat brothers for rape in the way wanker described.

That seems to be a bit of a leap, ltl, and your choice of such a shocking image might even be seen as intentionally provocative.

Have you heard of this new kindness initiative we've started here? I have brochures.

S_A_M

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The rape analogy is offensive. Your trite accusation that I'd defend a person in that circumstance actually contradicts history. I don't need to explain how imbecillic both of you sound making that analogy. You're embarrassing yourselves trying to cheaply grab the high road with that rhetorical gimmick.

They are not immoral. They are breaking the law. Those are two wildly different concepts.

I disagree. They are immoral. Tax cheats are partly responsible for sending troops to Iraq without adequate armored vehicles. They bear the blame for crumbling infrastructure, for increasing state level mandates. Tax cheats are responsible for your taxes being so high.

It's not a trite accusation. As hank noted, we all enjoy the fruits of a civilized society. We are all morally obligated to pay for that society's maintenance. I don't need a rhetorical gimmick to grab the high road here. You are handing it to me on a plate.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
They are not immoral. They are breaking the law. Those are two wildly different concepts.

Those are two different concepts -- but they sometimes coincide. I can see the arguments that tax cheats are acting immorally.

I would say that they are acting unethically, for basically the reasons Hank described. Does the distinction between morality and ethics make any difference to your argument?

S_A_M

P.S. You do see that your "enjoying the benefit of their risk" argument could apply to almost any crime, right/

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
That seems to be a bit of a leap, ltl, and your choice of such a shocking image might even be seen as intentionally provocative.

Have you heard of this new kindness initiative we've started here? I have brochures.

S_A_M

I am sorry, sebby.

Send a brochure, SAMmy.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I disagree. They are immoral. Tax cheats are partly responsible for sending troops to Iraq without adequate armored vehicles. They bear the blame for crumbling infrastructure, for increasing state level mandates. Tax cheats are responsible for your taxes being so high.

It's not a trite accusation. As hank noted, we all enjoy the fruits of a civilized society. We are all morally obligated to pay for that society's maintenance. I don't need a rhetorical gimmick to grab the high road here. You are handing it to me on a plate.

I you believe the govt is acting is far beyond its constitutional boundaries and believe the system is corrupted and discount your tax payments to address those concerns, you're moral. To do otherwise would be immoral.

You can't bring morality into this debate because I could make endless arguments in support of the position that not paying taxes is the only true moral approach.

It's an issue of law. I've handed you nothing but a soapbox to blast your own moral convictions to the wind.