tadmjones
Regulars-
Posts
2029 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
Everything posted by tadmjones
-
If life is the standard, how would causing an 'unsolicited' death further a moral cause?
-
No not in the way I meant it. One is an actual possibility and the other is fictitious double entendre. There must exist alternative actions you could take to improve/change you life or circumstances causing a death can not be the only one, yes ?
-
The issue is planning an action to hasten the end of a life. The OP thinks their life will be better after the death of the other individual and wants to orchestrate it, their only qualm is whether or not they will be let into Galt's Gulch Heaven.
-
Was the JFK assassination a coup d'état?
tadmjones replied to Jon Letendre's topic in Domestic United States Politics
Aside from fiduciary duties and legal instruments describing ownership, I’m more interested in assigning responsibility to individuals for ‘corporate’ actions. Take for example a pharmaceutical corporation that develops a product known to cause harm but distributes the product regardless based on the calculation that revenue from sales will compensate for any lawsuits related to harm and still generate an overall profit. If ‘the corporate’ entity was not recognized as a separate legal entity the owner(s) should be held personally responsible for the actions. Would not incentives more based on individual responsibility work to create a market that develops products with less negative unintended consequences? The corporate structure is a fantastic mechanism for raising and organizing capital, but it seems it also works to shield individuals from responsibility associated with things like known harms and or fraud. -
Was the JFK assassination a coup d'état?
tadmjones replied to Jon Letendre's topic in Domestic United States Politics
It was meant as sarcasm , a parody of an argument one might hear from those who refuse to see the level of corruption in practically all of our institutions. Corporations or private entities that cooperate with government, for ‘good or bad’ cease to be private entities. It’s a little fascistic, unless as an argument goes they are cooperating with the regime to investigate and curtail dissent er I mean criminality. I’m starting to think western culture needs to reconsider the idea of corporations and corporate governance. -
Was the JFK assassination a coup d'état?
tadmjones replied to Jon Letendre's topic in Domestic United States Politics
Twitter, Google, FaceBorg and the Fed , all private entities, quick bitchin and capitalism the shit out of it and build your own, whiner. -
Was the JFK assassination a coup d'état?
tadmjones replied to Jon Letendre's topic in Domestic United States Politics
Perhaps we can get honest money after an O'ist gets some juice at the Fed. -
Was the JFK assassination a coup d'état?
tadmjones replied to Jon Letendre's topic in Domestic United States Politics
I didn't realize until recently that the public had not seen the "Zapruder film" until Geraldo Rivera aired it in 1978. -
Are nation states a priori immoral ?
-
Governments are instituted, optimally, to protect the individual rights of the citizens , those who live in the jurisdiction of the government, how would a government violate the rights of those not 'in' its jurisdiction?, as a legal matter, again, as government is optimally its laws.
-
As to pragmatic concerns , given the level of our current welfare structure (social security and medical funding) unlimited immigration would be a more politically palatable situation if immigrants were charged a one time fee equivalent to a fair estimation of the average payroll/income tax a citizen would have contributed by the age of emigration. Along with a similar scheme for property taxes on a local level. One obstacle (among others) in implementing such a system would be large business concerns that pay wage earners , citizens using valid identification , social security numbers , would have a portion of their labor costs rise at least 6% overnight. FICA and Medicare payroll deductions to wage earners are matched by the employer. In some instances this means currently wage payers to ‘undocumented’ employees , not only can hide the non contribution of the matching portion but can also deduct the taxes , an instant ‘rebate’. Large business concerns wield ‘more’ political power than citizens , currently, as illegal immigration is a net gain for their labor costs the status quo will probably perpetuate.
-
In what way does meeting certain legal strictures for entry/immigration into a free nation qualify as a violation of non citizen rights?
-
Pragmatic concerns of population change and the extent of associated political disruption.
-
Actually act to start to cut down on illegal immigration, military pull backs, NATO pushback and demonstrate that corporate media is compromised, not partisan bias but narrative drivers?
-
There is just no substitute for bucket and rag on hands and knees to really remove the dirt from a floor. Last time I cleaned the house, I was wondering if the Gerlach and Stern experiment lead in a linear path to the development of the ‘bomb’, which lead to wondering if causation and identity share a hierarchical status or.. perhaps too many podcasts or fumes. Try changing the fumes and don’t be so hard on yourself, at least write yourself a good recommendation letter.
-
Dershowitz says the place is invested with quislings , but what would he know? He doesn’t hang with them anymore.
-
Would that it were, Stephen. Although .. a consumption tax with no ' loopholes' may be preferable. When did Weisselberg's transgressions occur ? and when was it he was charged ? the point I was discussing was that Trump and those in his orbit are being targeted for being in his orbit. ( I'm sure Frette never listed a sale price in their books for items purchased at full retail, proof being they are in NYC and not jailed )
-
Why was Weisselberg being charged? SDNY combs through all corporations in their jurisdiction as a matter of course to ensure compensation/tax compliance is kosher, in an even handed manner? Are we to assume if there are no examples of CFOs being incarcerated then those corporations have not compensated their employees in a similar way? I have to say my streak of radical capitalism colors my opinion of 'law breakers' that 'evade' the revenue man somewhat favorably.
-
The misrepresentation that crosses the law is a misdemeanor offense , the DA is trying to make it a felony by claiming the actions furthered a plan to commit election finance fraud. What percentage of the total outlays for campaign expenditures did the 130k represent? Reasonable-ness is still a character of law , no ? NDA's are legitimate legal instruments, why are they not to be considered an expense for Trump's private business concerns? Does NY state law have jurisdiction over a federal election, they can override the FEC? The DA's office has yet to publicly state what the 'other' crimes were that elevate the misdemeanor to a felony, so more to see . The court/judge in this case sentenced Trump's CFO to 3 months in Riker's Island because he wouldn't 'flip' on DJT, these are not nice people, most rational are 'nice'.
-
I'm not sure about the specifics of the taxing implications as they apply to expenditure(s), on 'each' of the 34 charges. The charge count is basically equivalent to being charged for shoplifting a bag of M&M's and then having the charges multiplied to account for each piece of candy in the bag. The reimbursement was even structured so that Cohen would receive payments that totaled 420k so that income tax woud be collected and roughly 170k would accrue to his personal 'take home', so an intent to defraud tax collection seems inconsistent.
-
The legal argument Bragg would have to make is that paying for an NDA or buying the rights to a story is the same as a campaign expense and that internal quasi-fictitious bookkeeping was employed for the sole purpose of misleading campaign finance statutes. A charge that could not be brought if any argument can be made that the use of the NDA could also be motivated for any other such purpose. ‘Protecting’ personal and or business reputations are legitimate ‘other’ uses, whether or not they are concurrent with being involved in a campaign for office. Hostile authorities in agencies with purview/jurisdiction over these actions already passed on any sanctions for the same activities, it’s bs.
-
It basically says that although NDA’s are legal not disclosing in your records the specifics of the agreements is criminal , if you are Donald Trump.