So let's say someone is convicted for being a high profile pimp. Or drug dealer.
Does "Sam the Collector" recharacterize what they "reported" verus what must be true from where the income was derived?
So if you put in a provision like this you defeat "the criminal wife gets to keep stuff."
Who is the money really owed to?
Trying to be vague. If the money perhaps in a class action suit goes to Sam TC then can it be said such is a party to it?
You know given far reaching political ideologies today it becomes more relevant.
How much makes the victim whole? Why isn't all that was unfairly attained the amount that makes the victim (s) whole?
© 2025 Thomas Paul Murphy
And if a certain politician trades on inside info shouldn't that have its own designation classification and higher rate?
And if a politician is required to abandon business activities the bottom line of that STC yearly statement should read zero. And any income after service in office perhaps needs to be recharacterized as really being earned while in office or as a direct result of being in office or extracurricular activities while in office.
*****'
And so Jesus said one of you has betrayed me. And he also said in order to follow me you have to give up all your wordly possessions. But Jesus did collect money, we know because he commented on how much he received. And it was his collector that betrayed him? No, they all did, because they all got a cut to the money. And they wrote about JC, which means they were indeed scribes?
No comments:
Post a Comment