Post by thread:[OT]:: $100.00

A little boy wanted $100.00 very badly and prayed for weeks, but nothing happened. Then he decided to write God a letter requesting the $100.00. When The postal authorities received the letter to God , USA , they decided to send it to the President. The president was so amused that he instructed his secretary to send the little boy a $5.00 bill. The president thought this would appear to be a lot of money to a little boy. The little boy was delighted with the $5.00 bill and sat down to write a thank-you note to God, which read: Dear God: Thank you very much for sending the money. However, I noticed that for some reason you sent it through Washington, DC., and those assholes deducted $95.00 in taxes.

Andre Abelian wrote: >A little boy wanted $100.00 very badly and prayed for weeks, but nothing >happened. > Then he decided to > write God a letter requesting the $100.00. > > > When > The postal authorities received the letter to God , USA , they decided > to send it to the President. > The president was so amused that he instructed his secretary to send the > little boy a $5.00 bill. > The president thought this would appear to be a lot of money to a little > boy. > The little boy was delighted with the $5.00 bill and sat down to write a > thank-you note to God, which read: > > Dear God: Thank you very much for sending the money. However, I noticed > that for some reason you sent it through Washington, DC., and those > assholes deducted $95.00 in taxes. US tax rates are much lower than most other countries', IIRC even Bill Gates is only paying something like 37% (the maximum rate). My economics professor told a story about his Swedish grandmother, who wrote a best-selling book on knitting. She got 1% of the profit (amazingly, she thought it was fair). So I think the story would make more sense if it took place in Sweden. :) Vitaliy

Vitaliy wrote: > US tax rates are much lower than most other countries', IIRC even Bill Gates > is only paying something like 37% (the maximum rate). From www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): USA 25% NZ 35% UK 35% Germany 36% Sweden 51% > My economics professor told a story about his Swedish grandmother, who > wrote a best-selling book on knitting. She got 1% of the profit > (amazingly, she thought it was fair). IMO it's not that much about how much taxes, it's more about what is being done with the taxes. The raw numbers don't say anything about the benefit the population has from paying the taxes. Gerhard

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: {Quote hidden}>> US tax rates are much lower than most other countries', IIRC even Bill >> Gates >> is only paying something like 37% (the maximum rate). > > From > www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf > (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): > > USA 25% > NZ 35% > UK 35% > Germany 36% > Sweden 51% > >> My economics professor told a story about his Swedish grandmother, who >> wrote a best-selling book on knitting. She got 1% of the profit >> (amazingly, she thought it was fair). > > IMO it's not that much about how much taxes, it's more about what is being > done with the taxes. The raw numbers don't say anything about the benefit > the population has from paying the taxes. At the risk of starting another economics-related thread and being sucked into it... :) Government is always less efficient at spending money, than the private sector. It's just the nature of the beast (recall our recent Shuttle software development discussion) -- those in the private sector who waste money, are sooner or later self-destruct. What's worse, the government always invents uses for the extra money it collects -- you often hear about new taxes, but how often do you hear about tax repeals? Government should only be providing services that are otherwise not possible (e.g., police and national defense). It may also *carefully*, relying on the advice of economists and not the opinion of the general public, exercise its power to adjust for externalities (both positive and negative): tax polluters, subsidize vaccines, build public libraries, break up monopolies, etc. That's it. It's not the government's job to provide medical care, free college education, or employment. I know the majority of people in Europe (and some parts of Latin America) think otherwise, but being a majority does not make them right. -Vitaliy

Russell McMahon wrote: >> At the risk of starting another economics-related thread and being >> sucked >> into it... :) > > ... > >> education, or employment. I know the majority of people in Europe >> (and some >> parts of Latin America) think otherwise, but being a majority does >> not make >> them right. > > That's certainly the right way to start one :-) Is that in reference to me leaving out New Zealand? ;-) Vitaliy

> At the risk of starting another economics-related thread and > being sucked into it... :) > > Government is always less efficient at spending money, than > the private sector. It's just the nature of the beast (recall > our recent Shuttle software development discussion) -- those > in the private sector who waste money, are sooner or later > self-destruct. What's worse, the government always invents > uses for the extra money it collects -- you often hear about > new taxes, but how often do you hear about tax repeals? We should have put Government in charge of the dot.com boom. Sure, a lot of money got wasted there (your definition of waste may vary), but imagine what could have happened! Tony

Tony Smith wrote: >> At the risk of starting another economics-related thread and >> being sucked into it... :) >> >> Government is always less efficient at spending money, than >> the private sector. It's just the nature of the beast (recall >> our recent Shuttle software development discussion) -- those >> in the private sector who waste money, are sooner or later >> self-destruct. What's worse, the government always invents >> uses for the extra money it collects -- you often hear about >> new taxes, but how often do you hear about tax repeals? > > We should have put Government in charge of the dot.com boom. Sure, a lot > of > money got wasted there (your definition of waste may vary), but imagine > what > could have happened! I still have a "cat" from that era in my "odd things" box. The company that produced it is long extinct. By the way, sorry about the "are sooner or later self-destruct". It started out as "are sooner or later eliminated" that I made an unsuccessful attempt to change into "sooner or later self-destruct." It's late, I'm going home. :) Vitaliy

William ChopsWestfield wrote: >> http://www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/ >> oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf >> (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): > > An interesting way of expressing the statistic, I guess. > >> USA 25% >> > I wonder if it includes state taxes (~10% for me in Ca), local taxes, > social security (~11%), and medicare (~2%) ? Good question. It probably includes all federal taxes, but it may not include state and local taxes -- which it should include, otherwise the comparison is close to useless. I've seen other sites stating similar numbers, which all seem to come from the same OECD numbers. I don't know where they did their data get from. Gerhard

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 08:43:42 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > William ChopsWestfield wrote: > >>> www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/ >>> oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): >>> >> >> An interesting way of expressing the statistic, I guess. >> >>> USA 25% >>> >> I wonder if it includes state taxes (~10% for me in Ca), local taxes, >> social security (~11%), and medicare (~2%) ? >> > > Good question. It probably includes all federal taxes, but it may not > include state and local taxes -- which it should include, otherwise the > comparison is close to useless. I've seen other sites stating similar > numbers, which all seem to come from the same OECD numbers. I don't know > where they did their data get from. Virtually *every* U.S. Government document I've seen citing Federal Tax Rates NEVER include Social Security or Medicare "contributions". That's right, the government calls them "contributions" vs. a tax, therefore they are not a tax... ;-) Of course every employer or self-employed person like myself is required by the government to withold/pay them so to me it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. If you add the additional 13-15% tax burden onto the ~25% base federal tax rate, all of a sudden the U.S. federal tax rate doesn't look so good. Matt Pobursky Maximum Performance Systems

On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 08:23 -0500, Matt Pobursky wrote: > Virtually *every* U.S. Government document I've seen citing Federal Tax > Rates NEVER include Social Security or Medicare "contributions". That's > right, the government calls them "contributions" vs. a tax, therefore they > are not a tax... ;-) > > Of course every employer or self-employed person like myself is required by > the government to withold/pay them so to me it walks like a duck and quacks > like a duck. > > If you add the additional 13-15% tax burden onto the ~25% base federal tax > rate, all of a sudden the U.S. federal tax rate doesn't look so good. Absolutely. Here in Ontario, Canada medical is included in the taxes, so we don't see it, except of course for an additional "health tax" that the latest government tacked on. Aside from that though, our Canada pension plan is not counted as part of the "taxes", so contributions there wouldn't be included, nor the employment insurance premiums we all have to pay for. Then there's sales tax, property taxes, alcohol taxes, petrol taxes, etc. It's one of those things that VERY hard to compare since where you "draw the line" is up for debate. Just like using the exchange rate to compare the power of a currency, using the federal taxes rates to compare tax load is complete rubbish IMHO. TTYL

Matt Pobursky wrote: > If you add the additional 13-15% tax burden onto the ~25% base federal tax > rate, all of a sudden the U.S. federal tax rate doesn't look so good. Any decent study should try to make a fair comparison (otherwise, you're right -- the findings are pointless). A Danish acquaitance reported that in Denmark, the average person ends up paying 60% of their wages in taxes. That's not counting the 18% (IIRC) sales tax on *everything* (including food). Vitaliy

On 4/24/07, wouter van ooijen <spam_OUTwouterTakeThisOuTvoti.nl> wrote: > > Government is always less efficient at spending money, than > > the private sector. > > To all other list members: please do not feed the trolls. Please point to the sense of the sentece above hitting the number below: troll [1] (trohl) v. <trolled, troll-ing> n. v.t. 1. to sing or utter in a full, rolling voice. 2. to sing in the manner of a round or catch. 3. to fish in (a body of water) by trailing a line behind a slow-moving boat. 4. to cause to turn round and round; roll. v.i. 5. to sing with a full, rolling voice; give forth full, rolling tones. 6. to be uttered or sounded in such tones. 7. to fish by trolling. 8. to roll; turn round and round. 9. to move nimbly, as the tongue in speaking. n. 10. a song whose parts are sung in succession; a round. 11. the act of trolling. 12. the lure or hook, with or without the attached line, used in trolling. [1350-1400; ME: to roll, stroll; cf. MF troller to run here and there, MHG trollen to walk or run with short steps] Derived words --troll'er, n. troll [2] (trohl) n. 1. (in Scandinavian folklore) any of a race of supernatural beings, usu. hostile to humans, who live underground or in caves. [1610-20; < ON troll demon]

troll [2] 1. combined with troll [1] 7. On 4/25/07, Vasile Surducan <.....piclist9KILLspam@spam@gmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On 4/24/07, wouter van ooijen <wouterKILLspamvoti.nl> wrote: > > > Government is always less efficient at spending money, than > > > the private sector. > > > > To all other list members: please do not feed the trolls. > > Please point to the sense of the sentece above hitting the number below: > > troll [1] (trohl) v. <trolled, troll-ing> n. > v.t. > 1. to sing or utter in a full, rolling voice. > 2. to sing in the manner of a round or catch. > 3. to fish in (a body of water) by trailing > a line behind a slow-moving boat. > 4. to cause to turn round and round; roll. > v.i. > 5. to sing with a full, rolling voice; give > forth full, rolling tones. > 6. to be uttered or sounded in such tones. > 7. to fish by trolling. > 8. to roll; turn round and round. > 9. to move nimbly, as the tongue in speaking. > n. > 10. a song whose parts are sung in succession; > a round. > 11. the act of trolling. > 12. the lure or hook, with or without the > attached line, used in trolling. > [1350-1400; ME: to roll, stroll; cf. MF troller to > run here and there, MHG trollen to walk or run > with short steps] > Derived words > --troll'er, n. > > troll [2] (trohl) n. > 1. (in Scandinavian folklore) any of a race > of supernatural beings, usu. hostile to > humans, who live underground or in caves. > [1610-20; < ON troll demon] > -

> It's one of those things that VERY hard to compare since where you > "draw > the line" is up for debate. > > Just like using the exchange rate to compare the power of a > currency, > using the federal taxes rates to compare tax load is complete > rubbish > IMHO. TTYL You need to use the international standard measure - How many minutes do you have to work to have enough money in your hand to buy a Big Mac (tm) ? * Russell * But, then you'd have to eat it :-(.

Vitaliy wrote: >Matt Pobursky wrote: > > >>If you add the additional 13-15% tax burden onto the ~25% base federal tax >>rate, all of a sudden the U.S. federal tax rate doesn't look so good. >> >> > >Any decent study should try to make a fair comparison (otherwise, you're >right -- the findings are pointless). > >A Danish acquaitance reported that in Denmark, the average person ends up >paying 60% of their wages in taxes. That's not counting the 18% (IIRC) sales >tax on *everything* (including food). > > > Not the average person, but the above average earner. I guess all in all the average tax is between 30 and 40 % *not* counting consumertax on everything 25%.. But then all medical help and education is free and the social safety net. is rather effective, if reduced, though, during the latter years under the rightwing governement coalition. Regards Vidal

At 11:41 AM 4/25/2007, Russell McMahon wrote: >You need to use the international standard measure - > > How many minutes do you have to work to have enough > money in your hand to buy a Big Mac (tm) ? * The above is only half the equation. The other half is: How many Big Mac (tm) hamburgers can you purchase after you've paid all your taxes and living expenses. dwayne -- Dwayne Reid <.....dwaynerKILLspam.....planet.eon.net> Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA (780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax Celebrating 22 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2006) .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .- `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address. This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

>-----Original Message----- >From: EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmit.edu [piclist-bouncesspam_OUTmit.edu] >On Behalf Of Dwayne Reid >Sent: 25 April 2007 19:39 >To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. >Subject: Re: [OT]:: $100.00 > > >At 11:41 AM 4/25/2007, Russell McMahon wrote: > >>You need to use the international standard measure - >> >> How many minutes do you have to work to have enough >> money in your hand to buy a Big Mac (tm) ? * > >The above is only half the equation. The other half is: > >How many Big Mac (tm) hamburgers can you purchase after you've paid >all your taxes and living expenses. And will the state health insurance cover you for eating a big mac? :) Mike ======================================================================= This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use, forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or services. =======================================================================

Vidal wrote: >>A Danish acquaitance reported that in Denmark, the average person ends up >>paying 60% of their wages in taxes. That's not counting the 18% (IIRC) >>sales >>tax on *everything* (including food). >> > Not the average person, but the above average earner. > > I guess all in all the average tax is between 30 and 40 % *not* > counting consumertax on everything 25%.. > > But then all medical help and education is free and the social safety net. > is rather effective, if reduced, though, during the latter years under > the > rightwing governement coalition. Yes, the same guy told me how the "unemployed" get an equivalent of USD$10, then get paid under the table for working odd jobs. It it's true, I would consider the safety net to be rather ineffective, and very unfair. Vitaliy

> troll [2] 1. combined with troll [1] 7. correct. or, in more words: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll Vitality: sorry, I decline your offer. No troll food in the fridge here. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

On 4/25/07, wouter van ooijen <@spam@wouterKILLspamvoti.nl> wrote: > > troll [2] 1. combined with troll [1] 7. > > correct. or, in more words: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll Ohh, understand now. I'ts like "making waves in a plate with soup". I must admit that I like such messages because those are "scratching" the piclists vanity. Most of the time I'm trying to define the personality of the people being behind the answer, based on those human reaction. It's much more interesting than follow the subject itself, mostly because 90% of the questions are easy and the list has already a bunch of answers. It seems nobody search for those answers on old posts... Vasile {Quote hidden}> > Vitality: sorry, I decline your offer. No troll food in the fridge here. > > Wouter van Ooijen > > -- ------------------------------------------- > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl > consultancy, development, PICmicro products > docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu > > > > -

Andre Abelian... funny joke!! you make me laugh. Gerhard Fiedler escribió: > From > www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf > (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): > > USA 25% > NZ 35% > UK 35% > Germany 36% > Sweden 51% Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being considered. In my country (Argentina) we just don't know how much taxes we pay because you pay for everything. Everything has taxes everywhere, taxes that you can't use to reduce your 'income taxes'. I mean , you pay for your annual income some taxes, but the other taxes you pay CANT be deduced...

Mauricio Giovagnini wrote: > In my country (Argentina) we just don't know how much taxes we pay > because you pay for everything. Everything has taxes everywhere, taxes > that you can't use to reduce your 'income taxes'. I mean , you pay for > your annual income some taxes, but the other taxes you pay CANT be > deduced... Why does it look exactly like Italy?? :-) -- Ciao, Dario -- ADPM Synthesis sas - Torino -- http://www.adpm.tk

Mauricio Giovagnini wrote: >> From >> www.greaterzuricharea.ch/content/05/downloads/oecd_tax_revenue2003.pdf >> (tax revenue as percentage of GDP, in 2003): >> >> USA 25% >> NZ 35% >> UK 35% >> Germany 36% >> Sweden 51% > Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 > millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as > a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. > > He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were > really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being > considered. Without considering the doubt about what exactly is included in those numbers and assuming that they contain all local, state, federal, health, ... in short everything that's collected by any government in the country, there's always the thing that they are average numbers, not individual numbers. For example, a typical self-employed (sole proprietor) in the USA pays more taxes than her equivalent in Germany ("Selbständige"). This is due to the fact that a US sole proprietor is required to pay social security, whereas the German Selbständige is allowed to handle this part as she pleases -- pay into the government system, use a private insurance, pile up huge savings, do nothing at all... This more than offsets the lower income tax in the USA for most. Gerhard

Dario Greggio escribió: > Mauricio Giovagnini wrote: > > > >> In my country (Argentina) we just don't know how much taxes we pay >> because you pay for everything. Everything has taxes everywhere, taxes >> that you can't use to reduce your 'income taxes'. I mean , you pay for >> your annual income some taxes, but the other taxes you pay CANT be >> deduced... >> > > > Why does it look exactly like Italy?? :-) > > May be because wer are plenty of italians :) (me included, hehehe)

On 4/26/07, Mauricio Giovagnini <KILLspammaugiovagniniKILLspamyahoo.com.ar> wrote: > > Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 > millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as > a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. > > He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were > really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being > considered. Are you sure about that? All F1 pilots live in fiscal paradises such as Monaco and Liechtenstein.

Cristóvão Dalla Costa wrote: > On 4/26/07, Mauricio Giovagnini <RemoveMEmaugiovagniniTakeThisOuTyahoo.com.ar> wrote: >> >> Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 >> millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as >> a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. >> >> He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were >> really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being >> considered. > > Are you sure about that? All F1 pilots live in fiscal paradises such as > Monaco and Liechtenstein. Here <www.humanistische-aktion.homepage.t-online.de/steuern.htm> they say that he lives in Switzerland: it is with 30% in the earlier cited tax summary on the opposite side of Sweden in Europe. Gerhard

> Are you sure about that? All F1 pilots live in fiscal paradises such as > Monaco and Liechtenstein. Wrong. Fernando Alonso lives in the UK, while he was at Renault he lived in Oxford (the Renault F1 factory is 3-4 miles NW of Oxford). I assume he still lives there now he is at McLaren. AFAIK Lewis Hamilton hasn't moved his residency out of the UK yet, Ralf Schumacher lives in Austria, close to the German border, as mentioned in the link given previously by Gerhard.

It was my mistake. Its "Switzerland", not Sweden. And to be "sure" 100% I ought to be an employee of the Switzerlnand government, to check if he really has residence in papers, and not just "having permament hollidays there" :-) ;-) Cristóvão Dalla Costa escribió: {Quote hidden}> On 4/26/07, Mauricio Giovagnini <spamBeGonemaugiovagninispamBeGoneyahoo.com.ar> wrote: > >> Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 >> millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as >> a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. >> >> He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were >> really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being >> considered. >> > > > Are you sure about that? All F1 pilots live in fiscal paradises such as > Monaco and Liechtenstein. >

Gerhard Fiedler escribió: {Quote hidden}> Cristóvão Dalla Costa wrote: > > >> On 4/26/07, Mauricio Giovagnini <TakeThisOuTmaugiovagniniEraseMEspam_OUTyahoo.com.ar> wrote: >> >>> Michael Schumacher, the 7 times F1 world champion earned about 50 >>> millions per year in the last 5 years. 35 only is his "annual income as >>> a pilot" , the rest comes from publicity and other contracts. >>> >>> He decided to move to Sweden because he said that German taxes were >>> really a lot, so we should analyze what is this 36% to 51% being >>> considered. >>> >> Are you sure about that? All F1 pilots live in fiscal paradises such as >> Monaco and Liechtenstein. >> > > Here <www.humanistische-aktion.homepage.t-online.de/steuern.htm> > they say that he lives in Switzerland: it is with 30% in the earlier cited > tax summary on the opposite side of Sweden in Europe. > > Gerhard > Yes Gerhard, it was my mistake as I posted it in another mail. Its because Sweden and Switzerland, sound very similar in spanish and I mistyped it. Sweden = Suecia Switzerland = Suiza And in spanish you pronounce them almost the same.

Mauricio Giovagnini wrote: > And to be "sure" 100% I ought to be an employee of the Switzerlnand > government, to check if he really > has residence in papers, and not just "having permament hollidays there" I'm pretty sure the members of the German fiscal administration did that for you :) -- if he's just on "permanent vacation", he would have to pay German taxes, so I'm rather certain that he had to prove that he doesn't have to. Gerhard

Gerhard Fiedler escribió: > Mauricio Giovagnini wrote: > > >> And to be "sure" 100% I ought to be an employee of the Switzerlnand >> government, to check if he really >> has residence in papers, and not just "having permament hollidays there" >> > > I'm pretty sure the members of the German fiscal administration did that > for you :) -- if he's just on "permanent vacation", he would have to pay > German taxes, so I'm rather certain that he had to prove that he doesn't > have to. > > Gerhard > > Yes, that's what governments do best... pursuing people to pay taxes 8-)

Chris McSweeny wrote: >> Yes, that's what governments do best... pursuing people to pay taxes 8-) > > Just to bring back the strands of this thread - they do that a lot better > than private organisations. Now that is probably not agreed upon unanimously. Private organizations are pretty good about pursuing their debtors, too... I'd rather not owe a loan shark or a bank :) Gerhard

part 1 1007 bytes content-type:text/plain; (unknown type 8bit not decoded) {Quote hidden}> -----Original Message----- > From: piclist-bouncesEraseME.....mit.edu [EraseMEpiclist-bouncesmit.edu]On > Behalf Of Gerhard Fiedler > Sent: 30 April 2007 21:05 > To: RemoveMEpiclistEraseMEEraseMEmit.edu > Subject: Re: [OT]:: $100.00 > > > Chris McSweeny wrote: > > >> Yes, that's what governments do best... pursuing people to pay > taxes 8-) > > > > Just to bring back the strands of this thread - they do that a > lot better > > than private organisations. > > Now that is probably not agreed upon unanimously. Private > organizations are > pretty good about pursuing their debtors, too... I'd rather not owe a loan > shark or a bank :) or the mafia........ whatever some people say governements do not have a monopoly on the use of force No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/780 - Release Date: 29/04/2007 06:30 part 2 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (decoded 7bit)

Chris McSweeny wrote: > Yeah, but at least the mafia don't issue confusing forms and have > confusing rules, then fine you if you make a mistake, but take ages to > resolve mistakes they make Like in - "chef, i killed joe by mistake and carl saw me; what should i do?" - "kill carl and make sure that noone sees you this time." Sure sounds faster... > (and give you no compensation). I think I could believe better this if I ever met one who has received a compensation for a mistake the mafia made :) Gerhard