 | | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) Paying one's "fair share" is only relevant to WHERE one owes it. I think you are failing to understand precisely why the royal family of England owns so much property in the U.S. -- because it's cheaper for them here than in their own country! (...) (21 years ago, 13-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) But they don't 'dodge a tax burden' here. If they have land here, then they pay property tax here. Further, if they own land here, chances are they visit said land and therefore spend other monies here as well. Whether or not they spend more (...) (21 years ago, 13-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) Ah, the myth of the global economy rears its ugly head! The global economy is only good for people that can move hundreds of millions from a country doing poorly to one that is doing better. If you are not dealing in hundreds of millions then (...) (21 years ago, 13-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
Good points, but like most fictions in life, we stick to entity status for corporations because it largely works. For every bad corporation that makes the news, there are handfuls of good ones that promote employee welfare and good corporate (...) (21 years ago, 14-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) Strongly disagree -- as you knew I would. Your statement ignores the social contract that corporations have with the societies that provide them with the fiction that makes any of their business possible in the first place. It is not for (...) (21 years ago, 14-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) Well-put, and I don't disagree with the sentiment. After all, I'm supporting a position that good works are a reward in and of themselves without regard to any fiscal gain or loss! But to be a contrarian, a social contract isn't enforceable (...) (21 years ago, 14-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
|
(...) One primary recourse is for the government simply to declare off-shore tax-shelters illegal for corporations that do not maintain their primary base-of-operations there (Corporate Shills in the Legislature have squawked that this is an (...) (21 years ago, 14-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
