Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Marx, Engel and Morris on George

Expand Messages
  • walto
    ... Actually, in today s Globe, I see evidence that there s another dirty little secret lurking. To get Amazon to move enough people here to allow Mass. Amazon
    Message 1 of 87 , Dec 13, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@> wrote:
      > >
      > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > Tremendous harm is done by the private monopolization of natural resources. For one thing, it has required harmful taxes on productivity to make up the lost revenue.
      > > >
      > >
      > > This is society shooting itself in the foot. It neglects to reclaim revenue gained from commonly owned or commonly generated sources. Then to fill the gap penalizes the productive. The productive are the ones we least need or want to penalize.
      > >
      >
      >
      > So true. Just yesterday in Massachusetts, the Governor proudly pronounced his arrangement to start collecting sales taxes on Amazon purchases as a "win for everyone." (By "everyone" he means local businesses and labor who are lobbying him and state tax coffers.)
      >
      > I mean, I understand his desire to level the playing field for local retailers, but it never crosses anybody's mind for even one second that that goal could also be achieved by eliminating local sales taxes. (That would be a "win" for consumers, sellers and workers, but, of course, not for state coffers.)
      >
      > W
      >


      Actually, in today's Globe, I see evidence that there's another dirty little secret lurking. To get Amazon to move enough people here to allow Mass. Amazon internet sales to generate state sales taxes, certain "tax incentives" had to be supplied to the company. Not only does that allow Amazon a continuing advantage over local retailers not eligible for such "incentives," it also cuts into the coffer "win."

      W
    • Harry Pollard
      It all depends on what you are writing and who will be the reader. Unfortunately, modern schooling isn t great at producing readers so material must be made
      Message 87 of 87 , Dec 30, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        It all depends on what you are writing and who will be the reader.

        Unfortunately, modern schooling isn't great at producing readers so material must be made simple for them. Which point doesn't throw out other writing which may be more complicated as it conveys more subtle directions..

        Harry


        ********************
        The Alumni Group 
        The Henry George School
        of Los Angeles
        Tujunga   CA   90243
        (818) 352-4141
        ********************


        On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 6:55 AM, John <burns-john@...> wrote:
         

        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Harry Pollard <harrypollard0@...> wrote:
        >
        > However, I suppose the short sentence is now
        > the thing, which may or may not be an improvement.

        Harry, tabloid newspapers use short sentences. People are familiar with that. So, you have to write to what they can easily understand. If they have to do double-takes they lose interest. It is that simple. Churchill realised that a long time ago. His books on WW2 and super easy to understand. The proof readers would highlight parts of the book(s) and he would override them. In the end they thanked him for teaching them how to write simple English.


      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.