How the TAX system works :)

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten is $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings) .
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!” “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!” “That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

IDF general dodged U.K. arrest

Last update - 23:16 19/02/2008
Major General (res.) Doron Almog. (Motti Kimche) Report: IDF general dodged U.K. arrest as police feared shootout By Haaretz Service
An Israel Defense Forces general escaped arrest for alleged war crimes at London's Heathrow airport in 2005 because U.K. police feared an arrest would spark a shootout with Israeli security officials, the BBC reported Tuesday. Major General (res.) Doron Almog, planning to visit Jewish communities in the U.K., refused to deplane for two hours, after receiving a warning from the Israeli embassy of the imminent arrest. He then returned to Israel. Palestinian groups had pressed U.K. authorities to arrest Almog over his alleged role in the destruction of more than 50 homes in the Gaza Strip in 2002, prompting a British judge to issue an arrest warrant. Almog commanded the IDF southern command between 2000 and 2003. Police waiting to arrest the Israeli general on the ground did not board the plane due to concerns that a clash with Israeli air marshals or armed personal security would erupt on board. The arrest warrant against Almog was issued by a judge at the request of "Hickman and Rose" law office, representing the Palestinian group. The judge issued the warrant based on suspicion that Almog had violated the Geneva accords, which in Britain constitutes a crime. The judge decided to issue a warrant based on one such violation - the destruction of a home in Rafah - in order to allow the police to question Almog over three other incidents: the killing of a nine-month pregnant woman in March 2003; the firing of a "Flechette" antipersonnel shells at three Gaza youths and killing them in December 2001; and dropping a missile on a house in Gaza in July 2002, killing a senior Hamas man along with 14 Palestinian civilians. When Major General Almog returned to Israel, the British foreign secretary issued an apology for the incident. Hickman and Rose demanded an investigation. Related articles: · IDF general escapes arrest by London police's anti-terrorist unit · Israel may provide counsel to officials in war crimes trials overseas · Senior IDF officer to face dismissal for July kidnappings

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/955883.html

Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Last Updated: Thursday, 7 February 2008, 15:48 GMT
Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'


Dr Williams says Muslims should have a choice in legal disputes


The Archbishop of Canterbury says the adoption of certain aspects of Sharia law in the UK "seems unavoidable". Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.
Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.
For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.
He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".
An approach to law which simply said - there's one law for everybody - I think that's a bit of a danger


Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury


In an exclusive interview with BBC correspondent Christopher Landau, ahead of a lecture to lawyers in London later on Monday, Dr Williams argues this relies on Sharia law being better understood. At the moment, he says "sensational reporting of opinion polls" clouds the issue.
He stresses that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well".
But Dr Williams said an approach to law which simply said "there's one law for everybody and that's all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts - I think that's a bit of a danger".



"There's a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with some other aspects of religious law."
Dr Williams adds: "What we don't want either, is I think, a stand-off, where the law squares up to people's religious consciences."
"We don't either want a situation where, because there's no way of legally monitoring what communities do... people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression inside a community."
Multiculturalism 'divisive'
Under English law, people may devise their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party as long as both sides agree to the process.
Muslim Sharia courts and the Jewish Beth Din which already exist in the UK come into this category.
Dr Williams' comments are likely to fuel the debate over multiculturalism in the UK.
Last month, one of Dr William's colleagues, the Bishop of Rochester, said that non-Muslims may find it hard to live or work in some areas of the UK.
The Right Reverend Dr Michael Nazir-Ali said there was "hostility" in some areas and described the government's multicultural policies as divisive.
He said there had been a worldwide resurgence of Islamic extremism, leading to young people growing up alienated from the country they lived in.
He has since received death threats and has been placed under police protection.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7233335.stm