Thursday
The Italian government, desperate for any additional source of revenue as it beggars the surrounding economy with its imposts, has slapped a fresh tax on the country's porn industry. It will be intruiging to know just how much this tax raises or whether, as may probably happen in Italy, the tax drives the industry under the bed, so to speak.
Personally, I have more regard for people who earn an honest living making racy videos than tax collectors.

The Apostle Matthew was a tax collector, so there is clearly room for redemption. No? And wasn't Mary Magdalene, also called the "Penitent," a former prostitute?
So, maybe pornograhers and tax collectors are not so different after all. Both can be saved from their sinful ways -- which include taking our hard-earned scratch, one by temptation, the other by coercion, and both a form of complusion.
Posted by Nomennovum at December 15, 2005 02:12 PM
Maybe its a reaction to when La Cicciolina was an MP there. I think it would still take a lot to beat the Scouser who claimed as his occupation in his annual tax return a few years ago, "Crack Cocaine Dealer".
Posted by Julian Taylor at December 15, 2005 02:50 PM
I see no sin in me willingly forking over my own money for smut.
Posted by Duncan at December 15, 2005 04:45 PM
Italy is copying France. Of course the porn industry already pays V.A.T. - but most people do not care that this industry is being double taxed.
Still if you think this government is bad - wait till Mr Prodi gets in in April.
On Mary Magdalene: The mistake of identifying her with the prostitute goes back to a Dark Age Pope (I forget which one).
The Roman Catholic church admitted it was mistake a few years ago (the Pope in question had not invoked infallibillity, so there was no problem there).
Posted by Paul Marks at December 15, 2005 04:49 PM
" I have more regard for people who earn an honest living making racy videos than tax collectors." The tax collectors are just doing their job earning an honest living. Your scorn should be on the politicians who are elected by the people who want all the perks, 'protection', and 'safety' without paying the price.
Posted by ic at December 15, 2005 07:48 PM
With all due respect, ic, I disagree. Tax collectors are every bit as complicit in theft as mafia "enforcers" are in extortion. And they're not earning an honest day's living, because they have their jobs BY VIRTUE OF OTHER PEOPLE BEING ROBBED. This in no way lessens my scorn for politicians, though.
Posted by Richard Easbey at December 15, 2005 10:14 PM
Tax collectors' job may be a dirty job, but someone has to do it. They may be like enforcers robbing us of our earnings. But it's us who elect the politicians who impose taxes on us, we create the dirty jobs and let somebody else to do our dirty deeds. Mafia is different from our govt. We empower our govt. to rob us. We can get rid of the Mafia, but we cannot get rid of our govt. If you don't want the tax collectors at your door, get rid of the politicians. If you don't want to pay taxes, don't call the police when the Mafia is at your door because police are paid for by your tax dollars collected by the tax collectors. Fight the high taxes, demonize the spineless politicians, and the citizenry who elect those politicians, don't demonize the tax collectors who are doing our dirty deeds so that we can stay on our high horses.
Posted by ic at December 15, 2005 11:13 PM
Tax collectors' job may be a dirty job, but someone has to do it.
Not really.
They may be like enforcers robbing us of our earnings. But it's us who elect the politicians who impose taxes on us,
Who is "us"? I did not vote for them. None of them reflect my views so please do not presume my prior agreement to pay.
we create the dirty jobs and let somebody else to do our dirty deeds.
And all these dirty jobs produce demand for services. Privatisable, marketable services.
Mafia is different from our govt. We empower our govt. to rob us.
I did not vote for the mafia and I did not vote for the government, so not so different really. They both charge me for services I do not what them to do (i.e. protection) and would rather make my own arrangements if they woukd just leave me the resources to do so.
We can get rid of the Mafia, but we cannot get rid of our govt.
Oh really? Getting rid of governments happens all the time.
If you don't want the tax collectors at your door, get rid of the politicians.
I see we agree on somethings!
If you don't want to pay taxes, don't call the police when the Mafia is at your door because police are paid for by your tax dollars collected by the tax collectors.
Fine by me! As I said, I would rather have a choice of who I hire to protect me, but the police give me as much choice as the mafia if I decline to pay for my 'protection' in the manner they want.
Fight the high taxes, demonize the spineless politicians, and the citizenry who elect those politicians, don't demonize the tax collectors who are doing our dirty deeds so that we can stay on our high horses.
Nope. The "I was only following orders" defence does not work. Tax collectors really are no different to the mafia. Corporations do not send enforcers around if I want to opt out of buying their products, only the state and the mafia do that.
Posted by Hereward The Wake at December 16, 2005 01:33 AM
'Who is "us"? I did not vote for them. None of them reflect my views so please do not presume my prior agreement to pay.'
"Us" represents all those who live in a democracy which is ruled by majority consent. It doesn't matter whether you have voted for a politician or not, whether you have voted for your tax or not, when you live in a democracy, you are bound by the 'vote'. The key idea is 'majority consent'. You, as an individual, do not have to consent. You, as a member of a democratic society, is presumed to have consented, nevertheless. Ergo, as long as you live and work in wherever you are, you are abided by the law of the land, and you have to pay your tax. Your consent or agreement is presumed. Tough luck.
Posted by ic at December 16, 2005 02:12 AM
There's a skit from Monty Python about a tax on "thingy" that leads up to a great line which seems appropo to this lunacy---"Well, it certainly will make chartered accountancy more interesting."
Posted by veryretired at December 16, 2005 03:51 AM
ic - Your consent or agreement is presumed. No; what is presumed upon is submission whether with enthusiastic assent or by force, fear or fraud. But neither consent or agreement has anything to do with it. Neither is applicable to a situation without choice or negotiation.
Posted by guy herbert at December 16, 2005 06:45 AM
Government is about monopoly of force, I read an interesting book about the Mafia which explained it was not just any old criminal organisation - if it was it would likely have melted away by now along with the Krays - but its success came from the way it became a 'shadow government', enjoying its own monopoly of force, but behind the scenes.
Interesting stuff.
Posted by The Last Toryboy at December 17, 2005 07:50 PM










