It's over was: RI tax madness

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
[...] You took that list, and without any
basis, questioned the pilots' veracity, then wished the tax
man on them.

That's simply not true. You need to go back and actually *read* what I
wrote.

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

You [...] took that list, and without any
basis, questioned the pilots' veracity, then wished the tax
man on them.

That's simply not true. You need to go back and actually *read* what I
wrote.

Your first line was: "Are those people telling the truth?"
which is questioning their veracity without any basis to do
so.

Then you wrote: "If not, they may well find that the taxman
eventually gets around to coming back. I sure hope he
does." Since the tax man has no way to tell whether it's
true *except* by coming back, and your "hope he does" come
back wasn't qualified, you seemed to be wishing the tax man
on them.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
Your first line was: "Are those people telling the truth?"
which is questioning their veracity without any basis to do
so.

What basis do I need to ask a question? You're just being silly.

Then you wrote: "If not, they may well find that the taxman
eventually gets around to coming back. I sure hope he
does." Since the tax man has no way to tell whether it's
true *except* by coming back, and your "hope he does" come
back wasn't qualified, you seemed to be wishing the tax man
on them.

My "hope he does" certainly was qualified. All you have to do is look at
the paragraph in which it's found. That paragraph clearly begins with "If
not", which you even quoted. Certainly the tax man's ability to find the
truth one way or the other has NO relevance to my own statements.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Your first line was: "Are those people telling the truth?"
which is questioning their veracity without any basis to do
so.
What basis do I need to ask a question?

None. But then you can't claim you had any basis for asking
it.

Then you wrote: "If not, they may well find that the taxman
eventually gets around to coming back. I sure hope he
does." Since the tax man has no way to tell whether it's
true *except* by coming back, and your "hope he does" come
back wasn't qualified, you seemed to be wishing the tax man
on them.

My "hope he does" certainly was qualified. All you have to do is look at
the paragraph in which it's found. That paragraph clearly begins with "If
not", which you even quoted.

I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does. I said it "seemed" to be wishing the tax man on them.
If you say you don't wish the tax man to show up and make
the life of some fellow pilots more expensive and difficult,
I'll take you at your word, but that's not how I interpreted
it. They are friends of mine and shouldn't be suspected of
tax evasion by you or the CT Dept. of Revenue.

I agree with you that pilots, like everyone else, should pay
taxes they owe, but I don't think they should pay any taxes
they don't owe and I don't think they should be suspected of
it. In fact, in the situations we are discussing, the
pilots were not even engaged in a legitimate "tax avoidance"
strategy. They simply happened to keep their aircraft out
of state for reasons completely unrelated to taxes, and I
advised them of the fact that under CT law, they owed no
sales/use tax.


Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
What basis do I need to ask a question?

None. But then you can't claim you had any basis for asking
it.

So what? Do you actually have a point? What does it matter whether I can
or cannot claim I had any basis for asking a question?

Here's a clue for you: people ask questions to fill in areas of information
they don't already have. Since I don't know your friends, I have no idea
whether they were telling the truth or not.

Quit being so easily offended. It really looks ridiculous.

I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does.

You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean? Please, get off your high
horse. The entire paragraph was qualified. The presence of a period does
not mean you can just forget everything that has been written so far.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Quit being so easily offended.

I'm not offended - you've made it clear you did not wish the
tax man on them.

I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does.

You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No I told you what they "seemed" to mean. Who is being
offended here? :-)


Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No

No? Yes:

"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
I quoted it to be fair to you. It qualifies the possibility
that the tax man will come around, not your hope that he
does.

You are arbitrarily and incorrectly misinterpreting the qualification in my
original statement.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

You presume to tell ME what MY own words mean?

No

No? Yes:

No I told you how I understood them and why. I objected to
your immediate questioning of my friends' truthfulness and
perhaps let that color my interpretation of your words.
This sort of thing can happen with communication that is
devoid of associated clues in body language, and tone of
voice.

You are arbitrarily and incorrectly misinterpreting the qualification in my
original statement.

Interpreting your words is what I meant when I said I was
telling you what they "seemed" to mean. I'll accept that
you meant the qualification in the first sentence to apply
to your tax-man visit wish in the following sentence and you
should try to accept that I understood it otherwise in light
of the challenge to their veracity. You can object to my
interpretation, but it's what it was regardless of
objection.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Then you should consider that, rather than having written "It qualifies",
you should have written "It seems to qualify".

The phrase "If not" (referring to truthfulness) was part of
the first sentence (suggesting the tax man might visit) and
not the second (hoping that he *does*visit). Thus the
qualifying phrase was not part of the second sentence.
That's a fact. The interpretation of that fact is where we
differed, and with respect to that interpretation I *did*
use the word "seemed."

Your turn?
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.