And from the reports I’ve heard, Rubio bought the boat AFTER he paid off his loans from law school and 80 grand ain’t much for a boat big enough to take two engines (if the pictures are to be believed), at least if you just got your $800,000 book advance. Sheesh! It’s about like my using my tax refund to buy a used F-150. (And as a former Ford stockholder. let me give shout out to President Obama; the F-150 was the most popular purchase in the cash for clunkers program.)
As for the Secretary of State, in about 1969 the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have a right to minimize their taxes so if he wants to burn the gas to go to Rhode Island to get to his boat, that’s on him–it’s sneaky, but he has a right to be sneaky.
Lord Clyde, KC, 1929:
“No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue.”
Judge Learned Hand, 1935:
“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.”
#4: Absolutely agree. But the ones who make and support laws intended to tax you to death (and beyond), then do everything in their power to evade them, shouldn’t be squawking about the fiscal responsibility of others.
The same goes for a newspaper that once endorsed a candidate around the same time that said candidate donated $100,000 to the paper’s charitable fund, then found a need to report that a popular opposing candidate once got a few traffic tickets.
And from the reports I’ve heard, Rubio bought the boat AFTER he paid off his loans from law school and 80 grand ain’t much for a boat big enough to take two engines (if the pictures are to be believed), at least if you just got your $800,000 book advance. Sheesh! It’s about like my using my tax refund to buy a used F-150. (And as a former Ford stockholder. let me give shout out to President Obama; the F-150 was the most popular purchase in the cash for clunkers program.)
^, (vice period) and ^a [shout out]
As for the Secretary of State, in about 1969 the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have a right to minimize their taxes so if he wants to burn the gas to go to Rhode Island to get to his boat, that’s on him–it’s sneaky, but he has a right to be sneaky.
Lord Clyde, KC, 1929:
“No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue.”
Judge Learned Hand, 1935:
“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.”
Cheers
#4: Absolutely agree. But the ones who make and support laws intended to tax you to death (and beyond), then do everything in their power to evade them, shouldn’t be squawking about the fiscal responsibility of others.
The same goes for a newspaper that once endorsed a candidate around the same time that said candidate donated $100,000 to the paper’s charitable fund, then found a need to report that a popular opposing candidate once got a few traffic tickets.