Originally Posted by cabo35
Advogado Fact check: You gently admonish us by stating, "We should remember that the Italians justified Mussolini because he made the trains run on time. I guess we know how that turned out for Italy." My recollection of history, suggests more than a little divergence from your own. Italy after WWI was suffering from a poor economy, unrest, strikes and riots. It set the stage for Mussolini and his Fascist party's rise to power. To suggest his rise was attributable to getting the trains to run on time is a stretch. To suggest a parallel with The Villages and the Morse family is much more than a stretch. Are we now to add Mussolini to the Hitler, et al, characterizations of the developer. What happened to your advise to avoid argumentum ad hominem? Are you not fallaciously by innuendo comparing Morse with Mussolini?
You clearly cite the IRS case as an example of the developer imperiling our investment in The Villages. I would state it differently with less bias. In an earlier post I listed "what ifs" for optimists. Accordingly, in part they are:
.
what if someone realizes that The Villages is de facto, a municipality with legal sub-divisions called by a different name as a result of court and legislatively authorized government experimentation in-progress and accordingly, qualifies for the bond status in issue
what if someone applies common sense and realizes that TV and other Florida communities as well as similar new out of state developments are sanctioned experiments that need to go through a metamorphosis to reach their potential in serving the needs of people looking for something progressive and different in the way we are governed.
what if somebody realizes we are not a cult compound but a legally authorized form of government
The form of governance in Disney World and the Villages is unique. To a large extent, it is a bold experiment that has been adopted by copious jurisdictions in Florida and other states. From what I have read, issues have arisen that have no clearly defined precedent in state law or IRS regulations. They reside in the grey twilight of unsettled precedent. If the laws that generally regulate traditional government are without precedent in our form of governance, I would suggest in the matter you cite, the IRS is navigating uncharted waters. Ergo, the implications of The Villages IRS decision will set precedent for many others. In any case, what has Morse been charged with or convicted of that threatens your investment? How does perpetuating the worst case help our investments? Are you rooting against Morse? If so, aren't you rooting for a decision that will negatively impact your own interest and the interest of your friends and neighbors? I could be wrong, and I apologize accordingly, but it sounds like you are rooting for the IRS.
The Poaching Case. Regarding the topic at hand. The first point I would comment on is your rather persistent use of the term felony. You have clearly demonstrated that you are intelligent and have a command of the King's English. You also are clever enough to know that crimes are classified differently from state to state. You also know that true crimes are generally classified as crimes against the person and crimes against property. There is another classification that are labeled "offense" because they are not against property or people. Poaching is a statutory offense. It not against the person or property. It may be against moral principles and personal ethics. They are statutory offenses because they are regulatory in nature and defined by statute. Examples might be: a speeding ticket, failure to secure a building permit, littering, fishing without a license, hunting without a license, etc., etc. Crimes can also be classified as misdemeanors, high misdemeanor, felonies, disorderly person offenses. Each state is unique. In some states, misdemeanor is a felony and indictable and in some states its not. In Montana, poaching may or may not be a felony. Hunting elk without a license may be a crime, even a felony in Montana. To my knowledge withstanding possible correction, it is not in New Jersey. Further complicating the issue is the fact that law enforcement routinely overcharges with the highest classification and works for a plea to a lesser offense in the interest of saving time, money and resources. A disturbing question I have is the publicized fact that the investigation started 5 years ago. I imagine a good defense attorney can work with that fact. In conclusion, while being a devil's advocate of sorts, don't take that literally, I am disturbed by the conduct, if true, whatever it is classified. I do not understand why some resurrect and post 5 day old articles and call them updates if not to cast disparity on the character of the unconvicted and his family. But, that's just me.
You rather strongly make the case with your management integrity criteria analogy, that you would not invest with someone like Morse. You said, "If I were thinking of investing in a company and one of its top executives and his close associates were facing multiple felony charges, and, even worse, if that company, through its wholly owned newspaper, attempted to keep the news from the people with the most-legitimate interest in it, I would have serious misgivings about investing in that company."
How do your thoughtful, articulate representations impact those who read this forum and are on the fence about investing here? How does it impact someone who is thinking about investing in a small business here? How many homeowners and investors have you discouraged from investing? Could your observations be viewed as working against self interest, my interest and Villagers interest? By the way, the Villages Sun did carry the Montana story. Some research in the TOTV archives will produce its reference. It provided essential facts and shaded the article in the developer's interest. Your assertion that, "if that company, through its wholly owned newspaper, attempted to keep the news from the people with the most-legitimate interest in it, I would have serious misgivings about investing in that company." seems to be vicariously disingenuous. If Mr. Morse engaged someone to keep the news from the people as you suggest, he should dismiss them for incompetence.
You seemed to have tried and convicted Morse and his family on several broad based assumptions before the courts and the IRS have done their work. I respect your right to do so.
I have no connection whatsoever to the Morse family. I have been a critic of Mr. Morse on multiple occasions.
Thanks for the challenge.
|