All Hank, all the time.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I'm happy for you and Peanut. I'll keep him in my prayers.

God doesn't listen to the prayers of Socialists.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by spookyfish
There was more liquor then.

does the advent of sperm banks make a transfer "to my children" void under the Rule against Perpetuities?

Define a criminal legal system for Jupiter- the increased gravity will make items much heavier- should that increase or decrease the sanction against theft of property?

[Wank McBumsky]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Actually, it was you who originally couched it in terms of moral imperatives.



If by institutionalized, you mean that I agree that the tax system should be progressive, you're right. To the extent that the system is done badly, it's because of too many people trying to avoid their obligations and seeking special breaks for themselves.

We all derive benefits from the government and we all need to pay for them. Beyond that, we're the richest nation on the planet. I believe it's simply unacceptable that there are people in America who go to bed each night hungry. I believe that people who have more than enough should be expected to pony up a bit so that they don't have to go to bed hungry. Holmes called it the price of civilzation.

And at this point, I've come full circle yet again. We recycle this whole debate every few months and every few months I say the same things. You say the same things. Club says the same things. And Hank just sits in the corner of the cage and throws shit at the rest of us. I'm pretty sure I've played my part.

So, until next time....

At least Lenin, Mao and Castro had the courge to admit wht they were and take to the streets in defense of their screwy ideas. YOu pretend yoiu arent' one of them and you try to rear-guard your oppression on us with tax codes. Whose zooming whom?

[SlaveNoMore]

spookyfish
There was more liquor then.

Seriously, you had to be drunk all the time in law school to put up with this dreck.

You mean - some people weren't?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by spookyfish
God doesn't listen to the prayers of Socialists.

Or Jews. I guess I'm twice-screwed.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Or Jews. I guess I'm twice-screwed.

Odd that your views are more in line with our Puritan forfathers than others on this board.

From a Puritan perspective, estate taxes are good because they tax free money. Not to the decedent, of course, but then again s/he's dead and his wealth is now determined by the stregth of his morals, not his business accumen. But to the heirs, it's money not earned. Money not earned is corrupting, and causes shiftlessness. Money earned is reflective of upstanding morality. Better - if one must tax - to tax money that corrupts than money rightfully earned by the sweat of the brow, as these earnings are righteous, and indicative of one's moral strength.

(A perspective which also allows one to not have very much pity on the poor - if one is poor, it must be due to a moral failing.)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
2. And I'm done with having my name associated with it. Ty- please change the thread title to

"Arguing Tax Policy in An attempt to bridge the Yawning divide."

Take it to the Tax Board.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by baltassoc
Odd that your views are more in line with our Puritan forfathers than others on this board.

From a Puritan perspective, estate taxes are good because they tax free money. Not to the decedent, of course, but then again s/he's dead and his wealth is now determined by the stregth of his morals, not his business accumen. But to the heirs, it's money not earned. Money not earned is corrupting, and causes shiftlessness. Money earned is reflective of upstanding morality. Better - if one must tax - to tax money that corrupts than money rightfully earned by the sweat of the brow, as these earnings are righteous, and indicative of one's moral strength.

(A perspective which also allows one to not have very much pity on the poor - if one is poor, it must be due to a moral failing.)

Unless you have a confiscatory tax on estates, people who aren't poor aren't necessarily morally good. So just assume everyone is bad.

[Pretty Little Flower]

I never ever come here, but for once I felt compelled to post on a political topic because I just feel that what we did to that al-Zarqawi guy is fucked up. I'm not saying he was a model world citizen or anything, but this was just an out-and-out assassination, which is 1) against the Geneva Convention, and 2) contrary to the moral code of any civilized society. Where do we get off? Seriously. Anyhoo, just my two cents. YMMV. Thanks for playing.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I never ever come here, but for once I felt compelled to post on a political topic because I just feel that what we did to that al-Zarqawi guy is fucked up. I'm not saying he was a model world citizen or anything, but this was just an out-and-out assassination, which is 1) against the Geneva Convention, and 2) contrary to the moral code of any civilized society. Where do we get off? Seriously. Anyhoo, just my two cents. YMMV. Thanks for playing.

I see there are good reasons why you never ever come here.

S_A_M

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I see there are good reasons why you never ever come here.

S_A_M

Oooh, was that a burn? Nice burn!

[Wank McBumsky]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I never ever come here, but for once I felt compelled to post on a political topic because I just feel that what we did to that al-Zarqawi guy is fucked up. I'm not saying he was a model world citizen or anything, but this was just an out-and-out assassination, which is 1) against the Geneva Convention, and 2) contrary to the moral code of any civilized society. Where do we get off? Seriously. Anyhoo, just my two cents. YMMV. Thanks for playing.

Ironsped was right, for once.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
I never ever come here, but for once I felt compelled to post on a political topic because I just feel that what we did to that al-Zarqawi guy is fucked up. I'm not saying he was a model world citizen or anything, but this was just an out-and-out assassination, which is 1) against the Geneva Convention, and 2) contrary to the moral code of any civilized society. Where do we get off? Seriously. Anyhoo, just my two cents. YMMV. Thanks for playing.

2. All the press is about Zarqawi but we also killed a woman and child. Their crimes? Still upright people like Ty have been calling for killing Zarqawi for years now, so maybe it's okay. Really it's over my head.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
2. All the press is about Zarqawi but we also killed a woman and child. Their crimes? Still upright people like Ty have been calling for killing Zarqawi for years now, so maybe it's okay. Really it's over my head.

Yeah, we can kill whomever we want. Because we're the fucking U S of A. We make the judgments about who is bad enough to die, and who may live. At least we have leaders like Bush and Clinton, with firm and unwavering moral compasses, leading us in this decisionmaking process. Because it is a serious business, being God and all. I wiped my ass with the Geneva convention today after a particularly runny shit. Not even good for that.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Wank McBumsky
Ironsped was right, for once.

Listen, I know a shared Penske-Paigow-Shapeshifter-Ih8edjfkjr sock when I see one, and if you think I am going to dignify this idiocy with a response, you are sadly, sadly, sadly mistaken.