solidsnack9000

3 ms·

1.
by solidsnack9000 9d ago
IRM 5.17.7 ( https://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-017-007 ), is about corporate officers who have a duty "...to account for, collect, and pay over..." taxes and failed to perform that duty. I don't th
2.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
What situation do you have in mind when you say "...individuals can be held personally liable for their company’s failure to pay payroll taxes..."?
3.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
That still seems hard to make workable but I guess it doesn't seem impossible in the same way.
4.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
What does that have to with assigning liability to managers as proposed? It seems like the handful of people you're talking about are totally different people.
5.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
Something much more targeted is appropriate there. Maybe we need a regulatory framework where people own their own data. Make it impractical, expensive and burdensome to hold personal data you don't absolutely need. That has nothing to
6.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
They gain but under a structure where they literally don't control the company at all -- that's kind of the point.
7.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
There are many, many cases where investors are misled by companies -- this falls under the (very broad) heading of securities fraud and it's easy to find documented cases of it. It's not a question of doing their homework. There i
8.
by solidsnack9000 10d ago
It seems like there is something specific to this that you are missing. Holding all managers personally accountable for actions of a corporation runs up against the legal structure of a corporation -- a legal structure that is definitely no
9.
by solidsnack9000 11d ago
The most reckless will, of course; but most people won't -- they just won't do it. Corporations evolved the liability structure they have today so that large undertakings, where many people have to work together and where the bad
10.
by solidsnack9000 11d ago
There is no legal basis for this for taking the salaries of everyone who worked at the company in any level of management at any time. No large undertaking could ever function with such broad exposure to liability, anyways.
11.
by solidsnack9000 24d ago
It's not a matter of economics, corporate policy or belief in people -- it's a strategic matter. A country needs a secure and stable pipeline for personnel as much as for any other strategic asset. A country also needs to keep up
12.
by solidsnack9000 1mo ago
Let's say that, at least in concept, the shareholders individually vote. (Frequently their votes are delegated; in many cases, they even have no vote.) Say shareholders vote for a certain executive, call them Gaius, to be hired. Gaius
13.
by solidsnack9000 1mo ago
Shareholders can't be held accountable because they can neither initiate nor prevent actions of the company. That is an essential part of the bargain -- it protects the shareholders from each other and makes public ownership of compani
14.
by solidsnack9000 1mo ago
The limited number of people who attract the CIA's attention have data privacy concerns that go far beyond license plate readers. Warrants are not (and never have been) a solution for that.
15.
by solidsnack9000 2mo ago
The police officer can record and see anything they want; but I'm not sure what that admission changes. Hasn't that always been true? A warrant is for things that other people who are not police wrote down (or otherwise recorded
16.
by solidsnack9000 2mo ago
Government agencies frequently keep each other in the dark, even when they are the same government -- and the DMV is not the same government as many of the agencies (in other states or at the federal level) that would want this data.
17.
by solidsnack9000 2mo ago
I'm not sure how the approach you're proposing addresses the example JackFr offers. One reason is that the exam still results in disparate outcomes -- it only tests basic skills -- even though it is not in its design or operation
18.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
That is true; but that is also something fundamentally different.
19.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
There are plenty of protections against private entities in the US legal system -- other people, corporations and organizations. Those were not the issues the founders were trying to address, though -- the common law offered many such prote
20.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
Yes, there is a separate, harder procedure for changing the Constitution of the United States -- but that procedure is also a vote.
21.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
The page you link contains many interesting examples; but many of them are simply cases of making the vote harder -- requiring unanimous consent to change English-French bilingualism in Canada, for example -- rather than cases where the law
22.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
Everything in the US Constitution is amendable, though -- in other words, the whole Constitution can be changed with a vote. The US is founded on certain ideas about natural rights -- hence not granted, per se -- but that's somewhat
23.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
I don't understand how it is that the EU Parliaments votes to reject legislation. Presumably, this is not the default for most rules. Is this some special class of rule -- put together by a special committee, for example -- that has
24.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
I'm not sure any country actually has a Constitution with rights that are not up for a vote. There is generally a separate, harder procedure for changing the "basic law" or Constitution of a country -- for example, 2/3 o
25.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
It can be in their interest if their model assumes certain revenue from sales and service. Most brands of cars can be repaired by independent technicians. Toyotas are more valuable because they are reliable -- because they are repaired less
26.
by solidsnack9000 3mo ago
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin#1750s It's time to reconsider some of what we
27.
by solidsnack9000 4mo ago
It seems like you're saying, that PE, landlords, &c, are in a market where a landowner can hold on to property, not rent it out or put it to other productive use, and still make money. That is a problem, but not a problem with weal
28.
by solidsnack9000 4mo ago
I interpreted it to mean, it was much harder than something else -- than another approach. But I couldn't figure out what other approach they had in mind.
29.
by solidsnack9000 4mo ago
Host-to-VM communication uses vsock . Conceptually simple but In practice, much harder to implement. Much harder than what?
30.
by solidsnack9000 4mo ago
Most of Europe post-war was very poor. I'm not sure the trend could go back as far as that. How are you weighing the trend you highlight relative to overall long run success of private ordering, stock companies, readily available credi

More ›