And I though I was done for the night

I don't get many email arguments. I don't get ANY assholes…I think I make them nervous or something.

Anyway I got an email argument just now, and it's quite rational (if, in my opinion, a bit wrongheaded).

Hello. I find discrepencies in your report of April 10, from the UFE. First of all, President Bush hasn't been in office since 1962. Secondly, corporations do not pay federal taxes. Thirdly, wasn't it nice that you received a $400 check from the governmenmt so that you could contribute to your school and buy your children new school clothes instead of carrying the whoe burden yourself? Fourth, in my state, there are numerous corrupt misuses of monies, embezellments especially, and monies being redirected to useless accounts. If the politicians in our states would use the public's money wisely (the same could apply to the federal government as well), then there just may possibly be enough to do all the right things. We have just had the largest educational budget bill passed, written by Ted Kennedy himself, that allows states to experiment with new methods to improve the public school system. Fifth, is it fair that 1% of the people in this country pay 60% of the taxes? There are many people who do not pay taxes that work legitimately. There are many more who do not pay taxes but work, therefore dodging the system. Is this fair? Shouldn't everyone pay some tax? Why should only part of the nation pay taxes? All for one and one for all. If you want equal distribution of income, move to a socialist nation and stop trying to push it on the rest of us true Americans. Thank you, [Name Redacted]

Just so you know, UFE is an acronym for United for a Fair Economy, and the report my correspondent is disputing is in a post entitled, Unlike newspapers I always let you know when a post is just a press release.

Now, on to the specifics:

First of all, President Bush hasn't been in office since 1962.

True, but irrelevant. There is a lot of references to Bush's decisions and priorities because most of his decisions and priorities accelerated the ongoing trend, but the ongoing trend is the issue under discussion.

Secondly, corporations do not pay federal taxes.

In practice I would tend to agree…but I will note that since the GAO says

A majority of all corporations reported no liabilities during these years with a higher percentage of FCCs doing so than USCCs, an estimated average of 71 percent and 61 percent, respectively. However, the results were reversed for large corporations with a greater percentage of large USCCs reporting no tax liability.

Since the majority paid no taxes that means a minority did…and "corporateness" is not the criterion which determines whether or not one pays taxes.

Thirdly, wasn't it nice that you received a $400 check from the governmenmt so that you could contribute to your school and buy your children new school clothes instead of carrying the whoe burden yourself?

Rhetorical question.

Fourth, in my state, there are numerous corrupt misuses of monies, embezellments especially, and monies being redirected to useless accounts. If the politicians in our states would use the public's money wisely (the same could apply to the federal government as well), then there just may possibly be enough to do all the right things.

No dispute here.

We have just had the largest educational budget bill passed, written by Ted Kennedy himself, that allows states to experiment with new methods to improve the public school system.

Rhetorical, non-argument.

Fifth, is it fair that 1% of the people in this country pay 60% of the taxes?

When they get 60% or more of the benefits? Ya damn skippy I think it fair.

There are many people who do not pay taxes that work legitimately. There are many more who do not pay taxes but work, therefore dodging the system. Is this fair? Shouldn't everyone pay some tax? Why should only part of the nation pay taxes? All for one and one for all.

Yes, which is pretty much the point of the press release being disputed.

If you want equal distribution of income, move to a socialist nation and stop trying to push it on the rest of us true Americans.

But I don't want equal distribution of income. Never even suggested it. Maybe now that this slightly crazed week is coming to an end I'll consider writing up a position that will help folks avoid such an assumption…anyone who really wants to, anyway.

Posted by Prometheus 6 on April 23, 2004 - 8:48pm :: Seen online
 
 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"I don't get many email arguments. I don't get ANY assholes"

Oh, just you wait and it'll happen soon enough, especially if you have the temerity to say anything about racial matters that can't be reduced to "it's all black people's own fault."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.10
Comment: My Public Key is at the following URL:
Comment: http://www.alapite.net/pgp/AbiolaLapite.txt

iD8DBQFAjBXBOgWD1ZKzuwkRAjg4AJ9RqOtfdr1ugRHnNUj8CHV8NHwNmQCeKEmM
qGk1kfW9+TW9dTATVJaFlm0=
=ExRR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Posted by  Abiola Lapite (not verified) on April 25, 2004 - 3:47pm.

I guess it's coming then, because I have to go deeper than that.

Posted by  P6 (not verified) on April 25, 2004 - 5:12pm.