"In recent days their has been talk about the merit of taxing rewards gained upon the streets as a means of raising the quality.  The concern being that a lack of quality might be damaging to these shores.  This brought me to think about something that I believe to be a far more damaging aspect to these shores."

Raffi paused to add weight to her next words.

"The limitless, and unbridled money and street credits that can come from dicing.  It floods our markets and can threaten the very economy.  It has proven to be greatly destabilizing to these shores. 

I ask these questions of you today.  Should our leaders start policing the dicing community as they are talking about policing the streets?  Which of these aspect of our lives has the greater potential to be damaging to these shores?"

I don't think either should be policed, but as said in the other debate about this, how exactly would you be able to tax the dicers? What way would you go about doing this? I do believe that as long as there are those who win thousands in a single session of dice with that House guy who keeps trying to get me to play with him that there is no point in getting rid of the smaller amounts gifted to those for work that they put in-- regardless of if some people find certain works to be lesser than others and are constantly work shopping ways to put an end to it.

Rolling a few dice with House off in the corner, he walks back to the conversation scowling with his pockets being a little lighter.

When it comes to people who gamble, there's no real way to tell how much money they actually have and these people already have in the past, and most likely in the future, done things such as spend their hard earned cash to taunt Tyler Durden and his weak men into leaving their hideout in Delaware for the amusement for us all.

But I am interested to hear personally how you believe they could be taxed in a fair way that would make sense and actually be something that the community could enforce. Would you simply send them a telegram every time you've witnessed someone win a lot to ask for a cut be put into a fund, and what about those who win big on roulette or the slot machines?

I think this is the reason people are going for the lower hanging fruit, because this is a lot more complicated.

As Sisyphus seemed to be asking her specifically for her thoughts she added to the discussion.

"To be certain I don't believe either should be taxed.  I have an unstated purpose for why I am bringing this up and perhaps I might share that purpose at a later time.  For now I will speak of this from an academic standpoint. 

• You are correct that there is no way to know much money these people have and what they have made in the past.  Neither can we know these things of the participants of the streets.
• You are also correct in that we do not know if these funds and credits were used to the betterment of these shores.  The same is true of the good citizens of this nation, but it seems the government thinks taxing the good Samaritan is a noble thing.  Again we do not know if the participants of the streets are doing the the same.
• Now on to how these things could be policed by the current leadership
  • I specifically mentioned dicing as all the other forms of gambling are indeed impossible to track.
  • A log of dicing is maintained and is accessible to all.  With technology and some good old fashion hard work, a total could be reached on how much a person won in a day.  In fact it would be this exact method that would be needed to determine how much a street participant made as their rewards are also kept in a log and published for all to see.  Both fruit are relatively of the same height.  The exception being the blow back from the leaders that have well known dicers in their mist.  Why would they want to give up a clear advantage?  The blow back from the taxing of street performers would not be so big as their few measles credits (in comparison to what a dicer can make) don't bring a measurable financial advantage.

That's exactly what I meant Raffi in that you can't police super rich members of society because that's just how all walks of society seems to work, ours being no different, in that if someone has the money then there's going to be influence there which would put them above most people except for potentially an entire board of Godfather Chairmen working together to enact something and even then it may still prove to be difficult.

And right now we don't even have something like that as far as I'm aware.

The best scenario that I could see is creating some sort of foundation to act as a shell corporation that allows everyone to place credits and cash inside that is then used to bring us things like more Tyler Durden wars, and contests. Which would most likely be far less of a tax and more of an optional decision that everyone would be able to make themselves on a case by case basis.

As MeToo says, the people with the largest guns and most men could attempt to enforce something, but I doubt we all as a collective want to deal with the potential friction that would create so early on in the rebuilding of this thing of ours. Although maybe I just don't have a strong grasp on what people want.

Sisyphus - you are, as usual, totally wrong.  My father was super, duper, paratrooper, rich, like the richest guy ever, and  he was policed, sent to jail, and executed.

So, please, please try and be accurate, otherwise you just look stupid and waste people's time.

@CommisarKuku, no.

I refuse to speak to a runner-up. Go win something and then maybe I'll have some conversation for you, until then this is the last time I will acknowledge your existence. Perhaps 2021 will be better for you?

Oh, I lost my civility a little in that quite obviously uncharacteristic outburst. I mispronounced your name as I've always had trouble with my Russian, and there was a bit of a mistake on which year it was. For some reason I thought it was 2020, which is such a long ways from now that the only explanation could be the cocaine that my doctor prescribed me.

My point still stands. You can only be policed if people have the power and ability to span through every city to make sure that the policies are kept by everyone, not everybody in this world has the power of City Hall.

Looks live I've won yet another one.

Sisyphus - son, it doesn't "look live" that at all.

The people know who the leader is in these here Streets, and that's me.  Someone who's bloodline contains hundreds of martyers.

Son, it's because of people like me that we can rest easy, know that any crazy plans to tax the newspapers won't happen.

I won't allow it.

Ladies (and Men), I hope you all find you someone that loves you the way that CommissarKuku loves CommissarKuku!

Raffi - what about Teq?

 My father was super, duper, paratrooper, rich, like the richest guy ever, and  he was policed, sent to jail, and executed.

Here we go again, You were richest at the time. You were easily not the richest ever lol, stop making a fool of yourself

Stark, look, I'm getting really fed up with this.

My father was a multi-multi billionaire.  It was estimated (by City Hall) that $16,800,000,000 went through his hands.  He owned a chain of casinos and a bank, and had financial interests in three cities, won multiple lotteries.

Stop living in the past.  Name the historical figures that you are so fond of claiming were the richest, or just grow up.  

Ladies (and Men), I hope you all find you someone that loves you the way that CommissarKuku loves CommissarKuku!

CommissarKuku, you getting fed up? Oh boy, you don't know the half of it. 

But I will post a portion of my other post that I made on one of your threads addressing this issue

CommissarKuku, Castielle had just over 60k credits, Sticks had over 100k credits (but been told he has way more now or used to since selling them) and Sadness had minimum 55k credits  . And that's all that I know, in the amount of years this game has been running wouldn't be surprised if there handfuls of people. 

So, 16.8b is pocket cash. Calm down.

So, you were in fact very very rich, but remember the top dogs made their money legitimately.

It is my opinion they money made from the dicing halls and the 'Credits' that you have are yours and yours only.

Personally I shall never lay claim to these. I shall never demand them or that you be taxed on this measure of your wealth. I would like to think that my members would drop me a little should they ever win big because they respect my leadership and what UKIP stands for.

The only time I may be concerned was if I were to visit a hall and see my member dropping millions of dollars through the banks hands but they hadn't kicked up this weeks tribute. Especially if they were also being followed round by 180 plus bodyguards.

That I would view as highly disrespectful.

Stark - so, Castille had $24Bn, and Sticks $40bn - in credit stock.  They couldn't cash them all in - there simply isn't enough money available.

In simple cash terms, my father was not only the wealthiest man who ever lived in this society: it is inconceivable that anyone will ever have his wealth again.

Stark - so, Castille had $24Bn, and Sticks $40bn - in credit stock.  They couldn't cash them all in - there simply isn't enough money available.

CommissarKuku, Why would they want to liquidate all there assets at once? That would be utter silliness. But I don't think you realise that cash isn't the only sort of payment in this world.

There is certainly enough amount of money to pay for all their bodyguards and all their regime members. And anything else that would lay foundation to their empire. Remember, that's cash alone. 

Your only argument would be the hit-list, There is certainly enough money in the game alone to have people dead. Let alone credit incentives for their deaths. But really, if a guy with that amount of credits wants someone/ a group dead, they are dead.

I am sure you were aware, how many people were giving you attention cause of the amount of cash you had, so imagine, the amount of influence they would of had or could have (if that was their intention)

Your Cash just allows for very very easy access right?  So let me put it this way:

1. Why does guys/girls love skirts? Easy access right? (your cash is the skirt)

2. If you are a guy, and a girl wants to get down and dirty with you, but she is wearing leggings. Not so easy access right? (leggings is the credits)

3. Think he is just gonna walk away? I certainly wouldn't, would you? 

I would be concerned if you don't understand what I am saying.

So in reality, Was your father the Most Powerful Mobster in Society of all time, That would be a simple no. But no denying he was most powerful at that time. That's still something to be proud of in a way.. Legitimately or Illegitimately. 

But I also don't expect you to respond CommissarKuku, I don't mean that as a dig. I just  know that you only reply when you think you have a smart response or think you are in the right.