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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (151787)	12/19/2005 2:38:57 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 793759

DMA, I noticed the 'let's tax it' suggestion too, but let it go. Of course, if drugs are taxed, the criminality will remain as people will rightly wonder why they should pay tax on something. We would have the police chasing the drug runners to collect tax and we'd be right back where we started. In fairness to PB, he did say "a little". You can be sure though that the "little" stricture would rapidly move to "a lot" to match the taxes on cigarettes as cigarette manufacturers would quickly complain that their product is unfairly penalized. The solution would not be to lower cigarette, or booze, taxes. Just leave people alone. How hard is it to adopt that philosophy? I suppose while people are envious and greedy, they can't bear to see others doing something enjoyable or profitable, and want to attack them, like chimps and other biological beings rob others of found-wealth. I wonder if the tax collectors and government people realize that they are just like chimps and that's why they do it. They try to construct some high-faluting "good for the community" argument to justify their first class travel, salaries, accommodation, meals, perks and pensions on government business. Mqurice