Mailyn

Thanks. I'll have a look when I have time.

If there is a LEGAL way for working class people to 'evade paying some of their taxes' (and this of course is referring to the aforementioned 'loopholes') - then fine. Go for it. I would, too. But generally, I believe in paying tax because it pays for free education and free medical care - amongst other things. (The amount that one has to pay is a separate issue and is not discussed here.)
However, if one knows that evading tax is actually illegal, one should not be doing it. Why? (Forgetting the moral/ethical issues) because, if one is supporting a family and one does not pay taxes and is punished, whether by a fine or a period of incarceration, one is leaving his / her family worse off - in more ways than one.

When a drama takes a long time to be subbed or shown on free sites, I forget to go back to check, so I have not actually watched it as I am busy catching up on other dramas.

It is now on KissKh with English subs

Is it so hard for you to understand that retired people can still work?

@Theresa: No, I am not wrong because I was not speaking specifically of one country. Anything stated about Chinese laws (in my response) was not my opinion but was taken from a website citing Chinese law. (If this is incorrect, it makes the author wrong and not I). Different countries have different laws in regard to this. I know that it is not always a crime - because otherwise, why would there be loopholes in the law (such as there is in the UK) for the rich to get away with paying fewer taxes. A 'loophole', though, is usually an unintended result of a law (or part of a law.)

Now that the 40 hour limit has been suspended, I wonder if we'll ever get to see the uncut version?

It is also on Kiss Kh (minus the sound cuts one tends to get on youtube).

Outraged? No, Dear. That is your assumption. Believing that people should pay their taxes is an opinion. Believing that people, especially the rich ones (and when I wrote that, I never once thought of Chinese / Korean celebrities but rich British or American upper classes / businessmen who are able to use off-shore tax havens because of loopholes in the law) is still just an opinion. * Why do you assume that that giving an opinion requires one to emote? And why do you assume - no, wrongly state - that I was attacking an an actor just because I am replying to a comment written about him in this space rather than 'Reddit'. ** These are all your misconceptions. Your thinking in this regard is flawed.
As for "insinuating", you, by referring to my colleague as an "imaginary friend" are attacking me because you are emoting so much. Isn't this what these zealous fans (that you don't like do? ) Or did you meant to say 'hypothetical'? When I reply to posts such as yours it is irrelevant to me who the subject of discussion is. I react to people like you who overgeneralise in their comments when accusing people or are nasty to others for no reason. You lump the innocent with the guilty just by using such words / terms as 'everyone', MDL viewers, etc. So, why should I not take umbrage when I am not one of them?

* I formed this opinion fifty years ago, long before the internet and long before I knew what a Kdram / Cdrama was, so how can it be because I don't like an actor?

** Why must I go on Reddit? Why must I even know what it is? Again, with the assumptions. You are now criticising me for something far less serious than not paying taxes. The irony!

No apologies needed. Just a thought, though. Looking at the way people are treated in general in both Korean and Chinese dramas (modern) one can clearly see real-life parallels.

Ok. Thank you

Thank you. Much appreciated. I am still none the wiser. After reading four of her articles, I can not see why someone would label her a weirdo (in such a negative way) or why that same person would 'hate' MDL for not 'firing' her because of them. The articles themselves, are unpolished - much as I would expect from a fan, amateur writer, or one of my students - but other than that... unless it is for a different reason entirely.

I don't know. I have never heard of her - and to be honest, I don't go out of my way to note who writes something as I am more interested (or not by the time I have read it) in what was written. I shall have a quick look. Thank you. P.S. I found her page but again, I would not know how to find someone's articles.

Sorry, but are you replying to the wrong person? I was not the one who said "If proven guilty." I was quoting somebody else - hence the quote marks.

I, too, as a mature, intelligent and fair-minded person care about proof and guilt and proportion - just as I care about the damage that is done to anybody, not just celebrities, which is done by toxic people of which 'fans' are only a small part. So, you misunderstood the the meaning or the context of "Does that make me a 'murderer by proxy'." You were lumping everybody together, and I objected to you including me (as one of everybody) in your accusation. Let me put it another way. According to you, if I invite a colleague to read / comment on this post, then s/he, too, will immediately become a 'murderer by proxy' of anybody who might kill themselves anywhere in the world over something which zealous fans (or anti-fans) may have written. Do you get it now? Don't include me, or other innocent people, of being part of that toxic lifestyle. I am not a knetz - whatever that is, or a 'fan' and I am not interested in the lives of celebrities. Anything that I learn about them is from reading posts on MDL.

By the way. Do you realise that what you are saying is that we should never find people guilty of crimes in case they kill themselves. You also sidestepped the fact that tax avoidance is a crime whether you (or I) like it or not.

It was not my theory. I was quoting a source "Under Chinese law and judicial interpretations..." which discussed the legal position - as I stated. Neither did I say that I believed or disbelieved her statements. I was quite clear in that I said my own opinions were not germane to the conversation. Thus, given that my opinions were NOT given, how can you accuse me of being naive? I too, am old enough to know better (I have been driving for 55 years) - but you still missed the whole point of my post. You STATED (objectively) that it was a 'clear case of hit and run' without clarifying that it was your opinion (subjective) or saying whether you were referring to the laws of China or of your own country. That is, you did not back up your claim. My post was about your claim and not the actresses claims - false or otherwise.

Under Chinese law and judicial interpretations:
Leaving the scene for legitimate emergency medical treatment is not considered hit‑and‑run.

If the driver leaves to save their own life, and does not intend to evade responsibility, and can be located or contacts authorities afterward, then it is not treated as 肇事逃逸 [zhào shì táo yì].

Leaving a passenger at the scene actually strengthens the argument that the driver was not trying to escape responsibility.

I don't know what your nationality is but, whatever your opinion is about her actions, you can not accuse her or something which is against your own country's laws rather than hers.

(If my source is correct) Chinese law would not treat this as hit‑and‑run, and Western terminology would not call this hit‑and‑run, because no person was struck.

My opinion on whether or not she committed a crime is not germane to this post. An assistant claiming falsely to be the driver... Well, that is a different matter.

Yes. I agree. If she needs emergency treatment she should be able to leave the scene if a responsible passenger could be left in charge (after the police were notified). I can even understand (not condone) why Xu lied and said that she was driving the car but - just why did she (the actress) need to cancel the insurance claim? I suppose it depends on whose name it was filed under.

Just what is a 'dev'? Do you mean developer? And just who is 'this Alice weirdo' and what does she have to do with this article? As for standards of writing - I know nothing about your sister's ability to write but yours, I'm afraid, is seriously lacking. This, in itself, is not an issue but, as you, quite hypocritically, attack somebody else's writing with your own poor grammar and punctuation, I find it a tad annoying.

Really? And you do?
I believe that rich people should not be allowed to evade paying taxes in ways that the normal working person could never do. Does that make me (a normal taxpayer) 'psycho' (whether eager or not)? Does that mean that if a person that I don't even know is 'driven' to suicide (as a result of committing an illegal act ) that I am a murderer by proxy? You don't even allow for the fact that this person said, "If proven guilty of course." It is okay to have an opinion - as long as one is actually opining and not just emoting. In argument, one should attack what is said, and not the character of the one who says it - without resorting to colourful rhetoric.

Well said.