dagblog - Comments for "Andrew Joseph Stack: Pauper with a Private Plane"

Do you have something other

Anonymous — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 04:50:15 +0000

Do you have something other than "repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different"?

Neither did Stack. And by

DF — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:02:41 +0000

In reply to Unlike Mr. Stack, I did not

Neither did Stack. And by that I mean both his efforts to evade taxes that he owed and his murderous airplane mission. If you think either of these things have or will change the tax code in any material way, think again.

Great post, Dr. C. I believe

DF — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:01:22 +0000

In reply to Andrew Joseph Stack: Pauper with a Private Plane

Great post, Dr. C. I believe that this is what Hobbes meant when he wrote that we look a the world through "multiplying glasses." For all of their bluster, I could pretty much guarantee that you'd never see Beck or Limbaugh pulling a similar stunt. In truth, they're pleased as punch with our present system.

Unlike Mr. Stack, I did not

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:12:55 +0000

In reply to That's horrible. You went to

Unlike Mr. Stack, I did not spend my time/money to find what is right. Buying a software to figure out what is my tax is not right, yet "I insure nothing will change".

That's horrible. You went to

Doctor Cleveland — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:05:06 +0000

In reply to tax code is 60+ thousand

That's horrible. You went to a professional for professional advice and got it.

Here's the difference, my anonymous friend, between you and Stack. You actually abided with the law, and when you got professional advice that you didn't want to hear, you took it anyway. Stack got angry that the person he hired to tell him what the law was didn't instead tell him what Stack wished the law would say. And then, instead of obeying the law, Stack murdered somebody.

And if you experience compliance with the civil law as primarily motivated by fear ... really, you have my sympathies. That must be a very painful way to live.

Is the tax code complicated? Yes. You know one of the reasons it's complicated? All of those lovely tax cuts that politicians keep trumpeting ... exemption for this, deduction for that. Of course it's complicated when you keep doing that.

tax code is 60+ thousand

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:58:04 +0000

In reply to I hate to break this to you:

tax code is 60+ thousand pages. Last year I went to a lawyer/CPA, got advice contradicting the text in turbo tax. In fear, I paid the bigger number.

I hate to break this to you:

Doctor Cleveland — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:32:04 +0000

In reply to rich or poor does not change

I hate to break this to you: "rich or poor" does change whether or not someone is middle class. The dictionary will back me up on this one.

I see you're quoting Stack's incoherent suicide note like its one of the highlights of The Federalist. I have to break this to you, too: that note is stupid. But on the other hand, it's full of lies.

Stack claims, in his self-pitying and self-justifying whine, that the tax laws are too hard to understand, and that makes them terribly unfair. But this is a lie on its face. Surely, Stack knew that he could not actually count his own house as a church and get a tax exemption. If that was beyond his intellectual capabilities, he was monumentally stupid. But it wasn't: he was smart enough to know better, but stupid and dishonest enough to try it anyway.

If you think Stack was a hero, striking a blow for the middle class, you're fairly monumental yourself. Joe Stack wanted other people to pay taxes so that he didn't have to. He was a liar, a bungler, a crybaby, and a fool. And if this sort of thing matters to you, he was a murderer, who killed a real middle-class working stiff who'd actually bothered to come into work that day while Stack was flying around in his toy plane.

rich or poor does not change

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 05:39:43 +0000

In reply to Andrew Joseph Stack: Pauper with a Private Plane

rich or poor does not change what many middle class faces every year:

How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly "holds accountable" its victims, claiming that they're responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law "requires" a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that's not "duress" than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.

I'm in my happy little bubble

Orlando — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:28:27 +0000

In reply to Andrew Joseph Stack: Pauper with a Private Plane

I'm in my happy little bubble over here, not thinking about American politics or American dysfunction. Pretty much all I've been thinking about is applying enough sunscreen. And sometimes, when I'll be cracking open my next cold beer. And now you have me all pissed off again. Thanks a lot, Doc. (No, really. Thanks a lot. Mosquitoes don't bite people who are stressed out because they don't smell good. And I've been getting eaten alive!)

The more the merrier. I

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:39:13 +0000

In reply to Don't mean to horn in on your

The more the merrier. I hadn't actually been thinking about the income angle, just race, religion, gender, and sexual preference. Maybe I'll use it (with your permission of course).