Quote:
Let'S not split hairs, I lined out a principle thing only. that there are details to be solved, should be clear, and in some parts I ndicated that.
|
I already said I agree with you on the principle. Furthermore, most criminal codes in the EU do, and set besides the prison punishment a fee that is directly related to the incomings. In Spain it is like that.
Quote:
The guy with that industry he does not own, but driving two cars: he could sell the Porsche and the Audi and buy a cheap 2nd hand Toyota, right? That thing drives, too. I mentioned monthly income levels as one example only, but also indicated that one could count all possessions.
|
Yup, but the two cars don't belong to him. They belong to the company he works at. Imposing the fee to the company would mean indirectly punishing the shareholders, who have not commited any legal infraction.
Quote:
It goesa without expalnation that we also should delete the many (even legal!) options for people to hide income from taxes and authorities.
|
Unfortunately that is exactly what most parliaments are trying to do constantly, and failing. Nobody would be most pleased to prevent people from hiding his incomes than the Ministry of Economy who collects taxes. And yet they can't.
Quote:
The probelm is that today we have a plthory of laws and special rules and exceptions from the laws that make it hilariously complex a matter and intentionally create a lack of transparency so that people have options to hide from taxes, researches, or whatever. What's more, lobbies and interested people do not want these complex things being simolified and cleared up again, for they not only make profitable use of the chaos around, but maybe even base their professional existence as "experts" for this complexity on this chaotic situation.
|
In a simple society you can keep laws/rules simple, but in a complex one itis simply impossible. Have you ever tried to write a set of rules for any community or private association? Even such an apparently simple task requires a lot of detail and thinking, as you want to avoid cases later not cosnidered by the rules -which cause troubles- and the additional problem is that if you rule too much, you fossilize the community. I agree in that today we have too much bureacracy and probably administrative laws, but in all most of the legal system is necessary as it is, with that level of complexity. Otherwise it wouldn't work at all.
Quote:
I am certain that the law codes of our nations cannot be reapired and sorted out, for that they are already too much messed up and too complicated. I would like to see them getting thrown out of the window completely and being done new froms cratch, while we must find ways to make sure that they cannot againb mutiate like cancer again and do not get written by politicial and economical lobbyists.
|
If we would start from zero and rewrite everything, we would probably end up with the same thing again. And those codes are not always written by political and economical lobbyist. For example, the criminal codes in all europe (Save Britain) have their roots in the german doctrine, and are not easily made better.
But again, I want to stress that I agree with the principle you suggest, and as I alreadu said, it's actually implemented in many codes. Only it's very difficult to get it to work as intended. |
