Warren Buffet speaks common sense; alarms most Republicans

[giblets]

So because you are so enlightened, that means you can ignore arguments you don't like? Interesting, I personally thought that was contrary to Enlightenment principles.What, do you hate Spinoza for some reason?

The argument that the two are not the same, is the point I'm trying to get across.

WTF? I don't buy your arguments because they're ****ing stupid. If you think taxation of an entity is the same as government ownership than you're an idiot.

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't buy your arguments because they're ****ing stupid. If you think taxation of an entity is the same as government ownership than you're an idiot.

I'm saying that incorporation gives the government the ability to shut them down, that the government has to approve of the incorporation. This is contrary to the constitution.

[Asher]

Churches need not be incorporated to be taxed.

[giblets]

I'm saying that incorporation gives the government the ability to shut them down, that the government has to approve of the incorporation. This is contrary to the constitution.

Making churches pay taxes on their income does not enable the government to shut down churches it doesn't like. It doesn't matter if you pull some slogan out of your ass like "taxation implies corporation" which can't be found anywhere except for your posts on Apolyton.

[snoopy369]

LLPs are taxed. LLPs aren't corporations. Therefore non-corporations can be taxed.

Now, any chance the idiotic argument about taxing churches (which is 100.0% irrelevant to the discussion in the OP) can be dropped?

[Jaguar]

It's a well-crafted troll on BK.

[snoopy369]

It's ****ing up a perfectly interesting troll on people that are actually somewhat more difficult to troll.

[Ben Kenobi]

Churches need not be incorporated to be taxed.

Yeah, they would have to be.

I'm not quite sure how they would be considered a LLP?

[Flubber]

They did not do a hostile takeover, Ben...

Your whole line of reasoning is beyond stupid.

...

THIS

[Ben Kenobi]

Making churches pay taxes on their income does not enable the government to shut down churches it doesn't like.

Yeah it would. Suppose the Church didn't want to pay it's taxes. Gosh, the Church gets shut down.

It doesn't matter if you pull some slogan out of your ass like "taxation implies corporation" which can't be found anywhere except for your posts on Apolyton.

So you think that just because it's not on google it doesn't exist? Curious?

[giblets]

Yeah it would. Suppose the Church didn't want to pay it's taxes. Gosh, the Church gets shut down.

Yes, regardless of what their religious affiliation is. It doesn't lead to anyone's religion being banned. Being affiliated with a church doesn't give you the right to break any laws... would the members of a church get arrested if they started murdering people? Yes, but laws against murder aren't a threat to religious freedom.

So you think that just because it's not on google it doesn't exist? Curious?

Why don't you provide the source for your claim? Because you pulled it out of your ass.

[Ben Kenobi]

Why don't you provide the source for your claim? Because you pulled it out of your ass.

I just checked google. There are 5 cases of "Ben Kenobi is right" just on this site alone. Only one for Gribbler.

Therefore, since Google is all-knowing, it's 5x as likely that I am right.

Where's your proof.

Yes, but laws against murder aren't a threat to religious freedom.

Laws like Obamacare requiring institutions to carry abortion coverage are a threat to religious freedom. Same with taxation. The government uses taxation to punish people it doesn't like.

[Guynemer]

LLPs are taxed. LLPs aren't corporations. Therefore non-corporations can be taxed.

Now, any chance the idiotic argument about taxing churches (which is 100.0% irrelevant to the discussion in the OP) can be dropped?

Signs point to "no".

[Flubber]

Taxation implies incorporation.

Most baffling statement ever LOL. Did you get it backwards and mean that Incorporation implies taxation?-- Since taxation does exist outside corporations. But even backwards is wrong as there are corporations that are tax exempt. So as far as I can tell, neither implied the other

This is why corporations can be taxed, but the church cannot.

Many corps are not taxed as well (at least in Canada)-- Certain corporate entities are exempt from income tax on their earnings in they get certain status-- I know that some church types would reject this status-- the claim is that they are not exempt from taxes, they are immune.


If anyone actually gives a hoot about what Ben is probably trying to say and doesn't want to try to decipher it from the cryptic ben-speak, you can take a look at this link-- http://ecclesia.org/truth/501-church.html -- or here http://hushmoney.org/incorporate-facts.htm I am assuming that the arguments there are where Ben is headed

Personally I think this a sideshow and ask that if anyone cares to debate Ben on this, maybe a new thread is in order

[Asher]

Yes, let us focus on Jag outsmarting Buffett and the lack of intelligence of anyone who doesn't jerk off to macro books each night.