Posted on 02/04/2019 12:53:56 PM PST by conservative98
In its Monday story, the Washington Post acknowledged investigating the claims and deciding not to publish. But it said the Fairfax statement “incorrectly” claimed the paper found “significant red flags and inconsistencies within the allegations.”
“Fairfax and the woman told different versions of what happened in the hotel room with no one else present,” the paper said. “The Washington Post could not find anyone who could corroborate either version.”
The Washington Post didn’t name the accuser. But the paper said Fairfax and the woman met first met in Boston at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
Growing calls for Virginia Gov. Northam to resign over racist yearbook photoVideo “The woman described a sexual encounter that began with consensual kissing and ended with a forced act that left her crying and shaken,” The Washington Post reported. “She said Fairfax guided her to the bed, where they continued kissing, and then at one point she realized she could not move her neck. She said Fairfax used his strength to force her to perform oral sex.”
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Whether anyone believes this woman, or not, there is no evidence to support her claim.
I understand the difference between stocks and flows.
Do you consider human capital a part of personal wealth? It’s reasonable to do so, but how do you properly measure it? If you have income from a risky source (for example, dividends from high-beta equity shares), what interest rate would you use to capitalize it to a present value?
Most people can calculate their current annual income with the help of a few documents (pay stubs, bank statements, etc.) Very few, and certainly not the government, can calculate a comprehensive, reasonable accurate measure of their wealth.
I used to ask my students if they were wealthy. Most would reply something like, “No; I only have a part-time job, a ten-year-old car, and some junky furniture.” But they didn’t understand the distinction between temporary (current) and permanent (life-cycle) wealth. A sensible wealth tax would, at a minimum, recognize that distinction.
There is a large professional literature on wealth versus income taxation that deals with both the theoretical and practical difficulties of properly measuring the relevant base.
“First, we already have a tax on wealth;”
There is a federal inheritance tax on amounts above $11.4 million, but revenue from it is less than $20 billion per year (less than 1% of total federal tax revenue. Most of the super rich, to whose estates the tax would apply in principle, are able to shelter much of their assets from this tax.
I’m not defending a wealth tax; on the contrary, I think it would raise little revenue, and further distort individual saving and investment decisions.
>>>by telling her they had a “mutual friend”<<<
Well, he took her there to meet her new Mutual Friend, but close enough for Government work.
Willie Brown probably did the same with Kamala.
Let me introduce myself...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.