News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by baq on Monday November 15, 2021 @04:13AM (#29225349)
How do you justify burning assets for tax purposes then? It’d be much better if they could simply give the planes to the taxman if they couldn’t pay the tax.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by phreeza on Monday November 15, 2021 @10:02AM (#29228187)
It's possible for a policy to result in an net positive even if it entails some individual negative examples.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by baq on Monday November 15, 2021 @11:59AM (#29229555)
it's a given for any policy, but we aren't talking about generalizations here; in the end, it's the particular that matters.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by phreeza on Monday November 15, 2021 @02:10PM (#29231284)
It depends on the alternative you are suggesting. No taxes? A bureaucracy so vast that can handle all imaginable edge cases? Individual discretion of the tax assessor? I think all these could fix this particular problem but might lead to worse outcomes overall.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by baq on Monday November 15, 2021 @02:35PM (#29231631)
i suggested the solution right there - forfeiture of the assets that the taxman can't get the tax for.
Re:The bullet effects in Terminator 2 weren’t CGI by phreeza on Monday November 15, 2021 @02:52PM (#29231835)
Ugh I must have been half asleep when writing the original comment (toddler woke up at 4am). I mistook your comment for a knee-jerk libertarian reaction, but what you propose does make a lot of sense. I stand corrected.