Obfuscation?

[NonEntity]

Nomos Wrote:NonE, I notice you have the interesting habit of taking a specifically defined topic, cherry-picking a statement, and then making up this grandiose picture in your head to which you make statements like the above, grossly out of context and unreasonable. But ok. If I'm going to respond then I guess I have to deal with it.

You and I have different perspectives. Let me try and explain what you believe is "cherry picking" something out of context.

If a proposition is made which consists of multiple parts, all of which are pertinent to the proposition, and one of those parts is invalid, it invalidates the entire proposition. 2+2+7+3=14 But only if the 7 is actually a 7. If the 7 is actually a -123 then the conclusion is not correctly 14, but rather -116.

So when you present a series of claims and I find an error, I point it out. At that point the entire proposition can be reassessed in light of the need to exclude that one item and can be restated with valid arguments.

Your position regarding the nature of selling a product is based upon faulty concepts. True, this may be off topic of the main thread which was sales tax and the nature in which it is applied, but you made a statement suggesting that the price a vendor could sell his product at was totally in his control and extrapolating from that the idea that the sales tax was not an issue in regards to his profitability. That is simply false. As far as the vendor is concerned, it is a very significant issue. People will only pay so much for an item. The taxes are a part of that amount. If the taxes go up then his price must come down or he will lose sales. It is NOT something that he can just "pass through" with no concern. Which is what it appears that you are suggesting he can do.

So that is why I "cherry picked" that item. It needed to be dealt with in order for the rest of your proposition to be able to be dealt with rationally.

Also note that I find it much easier to deal with one clear cut issue at a time, otherwise erroneous data can slide by in a complex argument. And so I will pick out those items which are unclear or incorrect and attempt to get them dealt with so that there is a sound basis upon which to continue assessing the rest of the proposition.

If you consider this to be grossly out of context and unreasonable then I don't know what to say to you. You can't cherry pick the parts of an argument that you want to use to support your claim while ignoring those parts which fly in the face of your conclusion. That is simply not rational or dishonest, or both. I'm not accusing you of either, I'm simply pointing out the nature of the issue.

If you will note, in the other thread I asked you if I was correct in trying to nail down your complaint as an issue of fraud. You failed to respond. If the issue IS one of fraud then the nature of what profit is and how it is arrived at is totally irrelevant. But it was you who brought the issue of profits into the discussion of sales tax in the first place, so I'm simply addressing it.

Nomos Wrote:As far as local vendors go, I don't see your meaning about them getting hurt. Businesses already receive wholesale rates, receive discounts to those rates when purchased in bulk, and mark up the price so as to receive at least 2/3 the base cost. So they do make a profit, and it's their business. If they want to not pay sales tax then they need to take a stand like I am by challenging the requirement to pay it. If they don't then I don't believe it wrong of me to not want to pay what they are accepting to pay? Why should I take the hit?

Sorry, but the above is an assumption based upon wishful thinking. If it were true then no one would ever go out of business and no one would ever get extremely wealthy. Taxes are not irrelevant just as the prices of material inputs are not irrelevant. Both are relevant to the fact that there is only so much a buyer will pay for an item, regardless of what the vendor's costs are. The buyer sets the (selling - as opposed to asking) price.

This is not a cherry picked item. It is a core issue of the mechanical - as opposed to the moral - issues of taxation.

- NonE

[Nomos]

Bro,

I can't do this with you on this any longer.. I've made my points, I believe concisely. I've put what I said, what you said in the front and quoted verbatim. You were no where near the point I raised. How can you find error by creating discussion that is totally misrepresentative, out of context and irrelevant to the to point raised.

That's just amazing.

So you win on this one. Whatever that is.

~Nomos 8)

[Dionysus]

Can't we all just let agong????

:tongue2: