[Brenda]

Newfy Newfy:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So since these parents weren't big corporations the question now becomes we're these parental "Dead Peasant" Life Insurance Policies anymore fair than an employer looking out for his company?

Absolutely not. Parents doing that is also completely immoral and disgusting.

When did we all become dollar signs?

And that's why it's illegal in the UK for parents to take out insurance policies on their children.

Brenda Brenda:

I think this is disgusting. IMO, NO ONE should be able to take out a life-insurance but yourself (or as a parent, take one out on your children), with someone on it who gets the money when you die (other than suicide). When your kids die, you get paid, when you die, your kids or spouse get the money, or it pays your mortgage.

But an employer??? Fuck no.

As far as the kids go, I meant a funeral insurance. Not a $500,000 policy.

[BartSimpson]

I'm surprised some enterprising firm isn't causing lots of 'accidental' deaths to help balance the books.

[bootlegga]

commanderkai commanderkai:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I haven't seen it yet. I just heard about the dead peasant thing at the pub. Kind of blew my mind. I like capitalism, but it has to be contained and controlled.

No doubt, uncontrolled capitalism invariably morphs into robber barons and monopolies, which screw over everyone but the very wealthy. A little government regulation now and then can be a good thing.

So let's ignore the fact is was an overbloated tax code that created this loophole in the first place?

Which was taken advantage of because of the mentality that "greed is good".

It's the same reason for profit health care exists in the US, why companies like Wal-Mart (and Sears & Roebuck before them) can crush their competition with nary a complaint from consumers, why robber barons controlled much of the US economy in the 19th century, etc.

To me, obscene profit is just that, obscene. I understand the desire to get ahead, but to me it’s the same thing as hockey players refusing to play because their team offered them $7.2 million a season and they want $7.5. Really, what is the difference you’re your income is at that level? You can buy 2 Ferraris instead of one?

If Americans want to live like that fine, but I sure as hell don’t. That’s why I support government intervention in the economy. All things considered, our economy does pretty well even with ‘socialists’ meddling with it once and a while.

That’s why Harper’s flip flop on income trusts was a good thing. If the government hadn’t changed the regulations regarding them, every corporation in Canada would probably be an income trust and taxes would be solely borne citizens, instead of shared between them and corporations. He may have flipped on a lot of other things I find objectionable, but that wasn’t one of them.