Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

It is a problem with government, its a fact of life which needs to be borne in mind.
Then deal with the problem. Don't punish those who have nothing to do with the root cause.
There is no way of dealing with it, its a fact of political life.
Fuck Israel
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

It is a problem with government, its a fact of life which needs to be borne in mind.
Then deal with the problem. Don't punish those who have nothing to do with the root cause.
There is no way of dealing with it, its a fact of political life.
Of course there's a way of dealing with it. The problem is that it takes lawmakers passing laws to make it illegal for them to do exactly what they're doing. It takes integrity in politics. That's like saying it takes virginity in a whorehouse.

But it could be done--if the electorate held their officials accountable.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
Well yes, but there are things you can't legislate against.

The CEO of GM gets to have lunch with the President, Joe Plumber doesn't.
Legislate that away.
Fuck Israel
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

So don't legislate against the entire population, which is what you're saying.

Legislate against those who use their wealth to curry favor with politicians. That's what I'm saying.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
I'm not saying legislate against the whole population, I'm saying there is a problem which can't be dealt with.

People don't specifically use their wealth to curry favour, the existence of that wealth is what gives them access.
I don't know how you can legislate against that, Politicians do meet rich people and business leaders as part of the process of running the country, its unavoidable.
Fuck Israel
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

They also meet "normal" people as part of the process of running the country...it's unavoidable.

You legislate against buying votes...currying favor. Whatever you want to call it. You don't tax people four or more times on the same income, taking away from their families what they've earned simply because politicians are crooked. Because all you're doing is then giving EVEN MORE of that money--now LEGALLY--to those same politicians to spend willy-nilly.

Again, how does taxing a family's wealth stop government corruption? It doesn't. All it does is keep money out of the private sector.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5463|Sydney

Macbeth wrote:

The Steinbrenner family could be facing a billion-dollar battle over keeping its tax money.

Because of a loophole for 2010, the Steinbrenner family stands to save around $500 million in taxes after the death George Steinbrenner, owner of the New York Yankees. However, a group of senators are proposing legislation that, if passed, would mean the Steinbrenner family would be forced to pay back taxes.

"It would be retroactive and that is something the Supreme Court has held up in previous years," said Michael Briggs, the communications director for Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Sen. Sanders is one of the sponsors of the Responsible Estate Tax Act, which in part seeks to close the anomaly of the 2010 estate tax law. If Steinbrenner had died in 2009 or 2011, his family would have been subject to a more than a 50 percent federal tax on their inheritance. Steinbrenner's worth has been estimated by Forbes at $1.15 billion.
http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/ … id=5380442
Thanks for playing, we'll take half.

What a crook of shit. The man worked tirelessly his entire life, he should be able to leave his entire life's work to his children. Is there actually anyone who ''believes in'' the Estate tax?
We don't have this law in Australia as far as I'm aware. Once someone dies their debts die with them and any assets left behind are solely left to their nominated next of kin. In saying that I don't really see how someone ever "needs" 1.15 billion at any stage, and even taxing them over half that still leaves them vastly, vastly wealthy.

The aforementioned argument that inflation will eat away at people's money is a bit of a crock. People who have hundreds of millions tend to invest rather than just leave it in a Swiss bank, and those investments would have much higher returns than the effect of ever increasing inflation.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
I'm agreeing with you, I just don't see how you can legislate against CEOs of major corporations or the mega-rich from having massive political influence themselves or from passing it on to their offspring.

Limit political campaign spending, I don't know what else, reducing govt taxation and spending would limit pork-barrelling.
Fuck Israel
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm agreeing with you, I just don't see how you can legislate against CEOs of major corporations or the mega-rich from having massive political influence themselves or from passing it on to their offspring.

Limit political campaign spending, I don't know what else, reducing govt taxation and spending would limit pork-barrelling.
There are many ways to legislate against that sort of thing...governments are just pretty poor at it:

campaign finance reform laws
eliminate pork barrel spending/earmarks
enforce/investigate corruption/bribery

Again, politicians are not very good at this because it would require them to be self-policing. They would essentially be taking themselves off the moneytrain. The only time these laws are ever enforced are when the offenses are particularly egregious or the politician is on the outs with his party. Randall Cunningham and that guy from Louisiana come immediately to mind from the US...I'm sure there are examples from the UK and other countries, as well.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6906|London, England
You need politicians to somehow not care about their own personal wealth and bank accounts. One who is not influenced by money can hold some real power of their own. Unfortunately the system can weed people like that out pretty quickly. It's no good being one person standing ground surrounded by people who have been bought. You'll be finished in zero time.

It's so easy to garner wealth away from prying eyes that it's impossible to enforce it upon politicians to keep their personal wealth levels clean anyway.

These guys want their money because of power and greed. Power because they need the money for campaigning to keep their positions and greed simply because like most people they just want their bank accounts to be as big as humanly possible. And if you say otherwise you're a communist socialist god hater.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard