Re: All Legal Expenses Should Be Paid for by the Government
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:59 pm
Don't you ever get tired of using that worn-out phrase? To me, it's more evidence of your inability to think and express yourself.
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
What do you mean by "ordinary people's taxes"? That's not specific terminology, and can't be used for this analysis. As far as taxes, the only proper source is a single tax on property, property being defined as anything with intrinsic market value. That would include real estate, factories, equipment, airplanes, cars, trains, artwork, jewelry and anything else that has intrinsic value. Stocks, bonds, currency and any other legal document does not have intrinsic value and is excluded from taxation. There should be no income tax, sales tax or the thousands of other taxes and fees charged by the government. Since the only proper function of government is social integration, like a traffic cop keeping people from running into each other, whenever there is a social problem, whether it be somebody charged with first-degree murder or going over the speed limit, or anybody seeking social redress of some kind, there should be absolutely no legal expense of any kind to the litigants since this is the responsibility of government. And it doesn't matter what the caseload is, there can be no price tag on justice in a properly-run society. As far as serial litigants, it is proper for the justice system to make a determination whether any legal filing meets minimum acceptability for litigation.Greta wrote:Ordinary people's taxes would be largely used to cover the cases of serial litigants, the expert players of the system. Caseloads would increase exponentially; there wouldn't be enough lawyers to do the work.
However, there should be legal aid for those who can't afford adequate representation, but governments have tended to be reducing rather than increasing funding for legal aid.
I mean taxes paid by people who would not be scamming their way through the legal system.bobevenson wrote:What do you mean by "ordinary people's taxes"?Greta wrote:Ordinary people's taxes would be largely used to cover the cases of serial litigants, the expert players of the system. Caseloads would increase exponentially; there wouldn't be enough lawyers to do the work.
However, there should be legal aid for those who can't afford adequate representation, but governments have tended to be reducing rather than increasing funding for legal aid.
Bob, people post in different sized fonts to poke fun at you and the 125 font you use.bobevenson wrote:Don't you ever get tired of using that worn-out phrase? To me, it's more evidence of your inability to think and express yourself.
bobevenson wrote:Don't you ever get tired of using that worn-out phrase?
Think of it more as my ability to think and express what I think about your insanity and your complete inability to look at yourself with any shred of humour. It's what makes you a 'Yank' of the highest order.To me, it's more evidence of your inability to think and express yourself.
I don't have any legal bills; I speak on behalf of dopes like you.Philosophy Explorer wrote:How big is your legal bill Bob?
I guess people don't poke fun at you because you're so fucking bland.Ginkgo wrote:Bob, people post in different sized fonts to poke fun at you and the 125 font you use.bobevenson wrote:Don't you ever get tired of using that worn-out phrase? To me, it's more evidence of your inability to think and express yourself.
Thanks for the compliment.Arising_uk wrote:It's what makes you a 'Yank' of the highest order.