Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umn-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!goldman
From: goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman )
Newsgroups: net.taxes,net.abortion,net.kids
Subject: Re: An Immodest Proposal
Message-ID: <671@umn-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 13:40:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: umn-cs.671
Posted: Wed Apr 24 13:40:29 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 3-May-85 02:51:10 EDT
References: <3521@alice.UUCP> <5112@cbscc.UUCP> <978@ihuxb.UUCP>
Reply-To: goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman )
Organization: Computer Science Dept., U of Minn, Mpls, MN
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.taxes:824 net.abortion:1509 net.kids:1269
Summary: 

In article <978@ihuxb.UUCP> mcal@ihuxb.UUCP (Mike Clifford) writes:
>> Hmm.  What if we adopted a "flat tax" proposal that did away
>> with deductions for dependants.  Would that mean the dependants
>> (born or not) are not human?
>> -- 
>> 
>> Paul Dubuc 	cbscc!pmd
>
>
>No, of course not.  It would simply mean that couples would not get 
>a tax break for having children.


No, it means that it is 'open season' on people who don't pay their
taxes.  ;-)

		Matthew Goldman
               ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!goldman

Home is where you take off your hat...    Banzai!