[Rhodes22-list] Found discription of (in regards to flat tax discussions)(political)

[Bill Effros]

Ed,

I don't usually respond to this crap, but, out of friendship, I'll try 
again.

I have never followed the "flat-tax" debate because I know that 
ultimately you can't collect the same amount of taxes while everyone 
pays less, and you can't engineer "social engineering" out of any 
attempt to take money out of one person's pocket and put that money into 
another person's pocket.

My question of "How do you define 'flat-tax?'" was not a baiting 
question.  I didn't know what people thought they were talking about.  
So I asked.

Slim introduced the concept of a "flat-tax" but immediately admitted 
that he did not know what he was talking about.

Brad defined "flat-tax", and I think that Brad's definition is the one 
most people think of when they discuss the concept without ever asking 
for details.

I said that won't work.  It doesn't add.

Brad submitted something from the Wall Street Journal.

BUT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL IS NOT DEFINING "FLAT-TAX" THE SAME WAY BRAD 
HAS DEFINED IT!

(Sorry to shout, but sometimes you seem to be hard of hearing.)

The "flat-tax" as it seems to be understood by most people--a simple 
unitary national tax with a single rate--is not used anywhere.  "Social 
Engineering" always adds complexity as everyone fights to pay less and 
get more.

Bill Effros

Tootle wrote:
> I found a definition and description of Bill E and it is not anarchist.  Try
> this:
>
> Bill can be characterized as " the postmodern man, a dehumanized conformist,
> alienated, indifferent, and baffled, directing psychological energy into
> hedonistic narcissism or into a deep ressentiment that often explodes in
> violence. This perspective is derived from the existentialists' reflections
> on nihilism stripped of any hopeful expectations, leaving only the
> experience of sickness, decay, and disintegration. "
>
> and add "A fellow traveller is a person who sympathizes with the beliefs of
> a particular organization, but does not belong to that organization. The
> phrase must be understood as referring to people who "walk part of the way"
> with an organization, without committing themselves to it"
>
> It is one thing to ask a question looking for meaning answers, it is quite
> another to ask baiting questions and make provocative statements intended
> merely to agitate.  
>
> Thank you Brad for your meaningful posts of the last few days.
>
> Ed K
> Greenville, SC, USA
>
>
>