Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (15595)	9/4/2001 12:50:56 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

The tax laws are so dense, so voluminous, so obtuse, even contradictory, that is impossible for a normally informed and intelligent citizen to determine what the law says their legitimate tax is. Even highly educated and paid tax experts will come up with very different numbers on not all that complicated tax cases. Even 5 IRS agents will come up with 5 different numbers This makes the Federal tax laws unjust. There is no other word for it. I can't for the life of me understand why you and Neocon resist that label when the case is so clear cut. And I'm suggesting that "unjust" is not the appropriate word. If they're legitimate, they're just.

To: Lane3 who wrote (15595)	9/4/2001 1:26:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

If they're legitimate, they're just. I disagree. Maybe you should define legitimate in this context. What I mean by it is constitutional and legal and voted for by representatives who where elected in reasonably fair elections. If a strong majority in the US hated Canada and voted for a war of extermination against Canadians then it would be legitimate by these standards but it would obviously not be just. Slavery also used to be legitimate in the US. I'm not saying high taxes are like a war of extermination or slavery, merely pointing out that "legitimate" doesn't always mean "just". Focusing on in the alleged injustice of taxes just makes you angry and doesn't solve anything. Better to press for greater efficiency in government spending or in the elimination of programs you don't think warrant the collection of taxes. I agree that one must think of the practical steps needed to work against an injustice rather then just rant about the injustice, but if I forget or don't care about the reason for my opposition I am unlikely to push much for practical steps to try to contain or reduce the problem. Tim

To: Lane3 who wrote (15595)	9/4/2001 5:29:20 PM
From: The Philosopher	1 Recommendation Respond to of 59480

If they're legitimate, they're just. I assume by this that you think there's a distinction between legitimate and just. Do you define legitimate as passed according to the established rules for that government? If so, you are saying that the slave laws were just, apartheid was just, certain laws of 1930s Germany were just, and on and on. Is it your position that a government cannot pass an unjust law? If not, what is your definition of legitimate that differentiates it from just?