Skip to main content

View Diary: On Romney's Caymans Corp; or, One Question the Press Should Ask Mitt (71 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That last part is the key distinction (12+ / 0-)

    I'm all for tax provisions that incentivize this or disincentivize that.  (Not buying health insurance, for one.)  It's the provisions that are self-referential, about not paying for the sake of not paying, that are a problem.

    Romney '12: Bully for America!

    by Rich in PA on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 08:01:17 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Currency is a measure of value, as (20+ / 0-)

      the inch is a measure of distance, or the ounce is a measure of weight.  Using the measure to control the thing measured is intellectually inappropriate.  Might as well say human waists can't be more than 36 inches because there are only 36 inches in a yard. The use of measures to constrict the waist is inappropriate.  Which is not to say it doesn't happen.  Some of us are old enough to remember when women's waists were constricted by belts and corsets and the feet of Chinese women were bound.

      On the other hand, citizenship is a bundle of obligations, one of which is to provide material support.  If, instead of providing direct service or labor, one sends in a token of what one is owed to be paid by another at a later time, that's not only appropriate, but more efficient.  What worked in post-colonial days when citizens were requisitioned to labor on public works a certain number of days each year isn't practical when we're dealing with three hundred million people and a much more sophisticated skill set.

      While the U.S. is a free society and none of the obligations of citizenship are forcefully extracted, the obligations (to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office, to draft laws, to provide support, to enforce the laws) exist and, while it is also reasonable to have them carried out ad seriatum, rather than at once, those who don't perform their obligations or pay others to do them, are freeloaders verging on exploitation and deprivation.

      Calling exploitation a virtue no more makes it one than calling obedience one. Indeed, exploitation and subordination are on a par.  Using money as a shield to hide the exploitation does not change the exploitation; it only makes the perpetrator harder to identify.
      Is exploitation immoral?  Not if you're a predator.  Taking without giving anything back is the predator's natural mode.  And for some humans it may well be the default, perhaps because they have nothing anyone else wants.

      Willard's forte = "catch 'n' cage"

      People to Wall Street, "let our money go."

      by hannah on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 04:02:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (55)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (32)
  • Economy (28)
  • Culture (28)
  • Elections (28)
  • Law (24)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (20)
  • Environment (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Education (18)
  • Media (16)
  • Racism (16)
  • Politics (16)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site