Stephen wrote:
> Don't a lot of people do that with your constitution as well? Especially when
> talking about the Second Amendment.

Not really. The biggest debate is over the fact that it's poorly worded. 
People argue over whether the wording means

"Because we need an army, people can carry firearms"
vs
"People can carry firearms in order to be in the army."

I.e., the argument is over whether you need to be in the army to carry 
firearms, and it's not worded in a way to make that clear.

>> The shining example was "This tax is not a tax..."
>> which sounds outrageous, but the line reads more like "This tax is not a
>> tax for the purposes of determining, via total taxes paid, how much
>> something costs."
> 
> Let me guess. A lawyer made that one up or an accountant :)

It's basically talking about whether you can charge others for the taxes. 
I.e., if it's like VAT (where you pass it along to the consumer) or whether 
it's like payroll (where your payroll costs don't go directly to the price 
of the product).

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message