Tax EVASION is unlawful. Tax AVOIDANCE is legal. Taking full advantage of the tax code for your own benefit - including loopholes - is perfectly legal and morally correct. Whether or not it is POLITICALLY correct depends on your own slant. If tax code was SIMPLE and LOOPHOLE-FREE there would be no reason to have this discussion. Unfortunately there is a lot of MONEY and POWER tied-up in governmentally biased, overly complex, loophole-ridden tax codes...
FYI: Referring to a "tax avoider" as a "tax evader" could be libel/slander.
Let's examine the "Crackpot" argument a bit closer, please:
First, new opinions are ALWAYS at odds with "mainstream scientific opinion." In the old days, the "scientific old guard" used to have their opposition hung as heritics. Today, you are politically persecuted and discredited. Doesn't sound so much like science as politics...
Next, the contridiction of "extensive evidence" from the IPCC requires the acceptance that IPCC provides BOTH an accurate and unbiased record of scientific data AND the ONLY relevant explaination as to the causation. The fact that this body is named the IPCC instead of the IPCS (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate STABILITY) indicates a distinct political bias. Afterall, we are looking to undestand how our climate maintains STABILITY, not to point fingers at bad guys who "corrupt the earth to satisfy their avarice," right?
Finally, your reliance on CO2 as THE CAUSE ignores the fact that water vapor contributes much more significantly to greenhouse effects. Whether or not the leading contributor to global climate change is cyclic (sun, earth, astrophysics, weather, etc.) or caused by new concentrations of elements in the atmosphere (CO2, H20, etc.) the leading SOURCE of energy is the sun. It is BAD SCIENCE to ignore potentially NEW information just because it disturbs your politically neat wold view...
Slashdot Mirror
Tax EVASION is unlawful. Tax AVOIDANCE is legal. Taking full advantage of the tax code for your own benefit - including loopholes - is perfectly legal and morally correct. Whether or not it is POLITICALLY correct depends on your own slant. If tax code was SIMPLE and LOOPHOLE-FREE there would be no reason to have this discussion. Unfortunately there is a lot of MONEY and POWER tied-up in governmentally biased, overly complex, loophole-ridden tax codes... FYI: Referring to a "tax avoider" as a "tax evader" could be libel/slander.
Let's examine the "Crackpot" argument a bit closer, please:
First, new opinions are ALWAYS at odds with "mainstream scientific opinion." In the old days, the "scientific old guard" used to have their opposition hung as heritics. Today, you are politically persecuted and discredited. Doesn't sound so much like science as politics...
Next, the contridiction of "extensive evidence" from the IPCC requires the acceptance that IPCC provides BOTH an accurate and unbiased record of scientific data AND the ONLY relevant explaination as to the causation. The fact that this body is named the IPCC instead of the IPCS (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate STABILITY) indicates a distinct political bias. Afterall, we are looking to undestand how our climate maintains STABILITY, not to point fingers at bad guys who "corrupt the earth to satisfy their avarice," right?
Finally, your reliance on CO2 as THE CAUSE ignores the fact that water vapor contributes much more significantly to greenhouse effects. Whether or not the leading contributor to global climate change is cyclic (sun, earth, astrophysics, weather, etc.) or caused by new concentrations of elements in the atmosphere (CO2, H20, etc.) the leading SOURCE of energy is the sun. It is BAD SCIENCE to ignore potentially NEW information just because it disturbs your politically neat wold view...