SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (70096)1/10/2003 10:36:36 AM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
If you were in a business, and one division was not being charged and another was, you are moving the cost center. If this was for tax reasons (like the company I'm in is PROHIBITED from doing with its division that was recently acquired) then we'd be subsidizing them. You have a very limited understanding of subsidy that is not born out by the tax code. My interpretation IS supported by the laws of the U.S.

Your bank robber example is bad because it is criminal and not officially sanctioned. If it was legal to rob some banks and not others, it'd be more apt.



To: TimF who wrote (70096)1/10/2003 6:01:20 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
You're arguing on his ground.

Argue on yours.

The FA also provides that Congress shall make no law "prohibiting the free exercise [of religion].

The Courts have recognized that "the power to tax is the power to destroy."

Therefore, if Congress is permitted to tax the churches, it is permitted to destroy them, which is against the Constitution. So taxation of churches in any form is unconstitutional.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News