REJECTED MESSAGE: REJECTED MESSAGE: REJECTED MESSAGE: CDR: Re: Voluntary Mandatory Taxes

postmaster at engmail2.Eng.Sun.COM postmaster at engmail2.Eng.Sun.COM
Tue Sep 12 08:04:34 PDT 2000


Your message has been rejected and is being returned because it
appears to be a reply to an alias that is designed for one-way
communication only.  You should reply only to the sender of a message
sent to one-way aliases.

If you wish to complain about abuse of a one-way alias, you should send
E-mail to the postmaster of your domain.  For example, postmaster at Eng.

If your E-mail was addressed to more than one alias protected by this
filter then you will get a copy of this message for each protected
alias.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration,
-- Postmaster

P.S. This is an automatically generated message.

-----------------Begin Returned Message-------------------

Your message has been rejected and is being returned because it
appears to be a reply to an alias that is designed for one-way
communication only.  You should reply only to the sender of a message
sent to one-way aliases.

If you wish to complain about abuse of a one-way alias, you should send
E-mail to the postmaster of your domain.  For example, postmaster at Eng.

If your E-mail was addressed to more than one alias protected by this
filter then you will get a copy of this message for each protected
alias.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration,
-- Postmaster

P.S. This is an automatically generated message.

-----------------Begin Returned Message-------------------

Your message has been rejected and is being returned because it
appears to be a reply to an alias that is designed for one-way
communication only.  You should reply only to the sender of a message
sent to one-way aliases.

If you wish to complain about abuse of a one-way alias, you should send
E-mail to the postmaster of your domain.  For example, postmaster at Eng.

If your E-mail was addressed to more than one alias protected by this
filter then you will get a copy of this message for each protected
alias.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration,
-- Postmaster

P.S. This is an automatically generated message.

-----------------Begin Returned Message-------------------



On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Tom Vogt wrote:

>sorry, but you have no idea what you're talking about. this is an
>economic puzzle, not a political one. food, clothes, tobacco, gas/petrol
>and a couple other things have a very unique price structure, in that
>the demand is pretty much independent of price - you just need so much
>food or tobacco or gas, no matter what it costs, and you don't have any
>need for more, no matter how cheap it is. 

Hmmm.  It seems unfair to slap a huge tax on something if there 
are *laws* in place requiring people to have and use it.  I'm 
thinking specifically of clothes, since you mentioned them.  Is 
clothing particularly heavily taxed?

In the presence of laws against public nudity, that would be 
roughly equivalent to a "head tax"...  

Since there are no laws requiring people to use gasoline/petrol, 
taxing it seems more fair to me - it at least presents people 
with a choice so they can pay up front (for an EV) or during
the vehicle's lifetime (for taxes).  Or if they are smart and 
fortune smiles upon them they can arrange their lives so they 
don't need cars. 

				Bear







More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list