This is the rate of returns, but says nothing of the actual tax rates. https://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/File:Estate_Tax_Returns_as_a_Percentage_of_Adult_Deaths,_1982_-_2010.gif
So you are talking about lower tax rates of a minority of the taxpayers in the country.
I am not saying your statement is untrue - I don't know the fact myself. But these links don't back you up.
Also, comparing us to the "rest of the world" is not the argument. This does not apply.
I hear what you are saying, but the problem with your argument is that no one is forcing you to buy or rent a house in an ares where there is an HOA.
If you'd been living somewhere and then, later, someone was able to force you to join a group - then yes, I agree with you 100%. So far I've never heard of anything of the like, though.
This is why I have a poor opinion of cops in general.
When I make it known my distrust of police, I always hear 'they aren't all evil.' Which I agree with.
Are all cops pedophiles? No. Are all cops crooked? Probably not.
However, in story after story, when a single cop if found to be bad or do something wrong, he almost always is protected by the others.
Even if they don't do the bad thing themselves, the percentage of cops that are either complicit or cover-up or even just 'look the other way' is way, way too high.
These points are all true; that they seem so obvious to me is the part that is frightening!
There was an outage on the text-book's servers. No school today kids!
The other scary part is that the text-book companies have been dinosaurs for 50 years already. I can't see any story like this without thinking of Richard Feynman
I get the part about exceptions being bad. And it's extremely important. Super important.
The idea is if the government is allowed to keep things from us, and we aren't allowed to view their data, then there is literally no oversight (and don't give me 'Congress' as an answer..)
The point gets confused, but we need is transparency of the Government. Not transparency of our neighbors and selves. However, a conflict occurs when the government starts collecting lots of data on us.
Unfortunately, this is almost totally moot anyway. The government hides everything it does behind a shield of national security, and precious few seem to care. (That gives me an idea... all they have to do is declare gun registrations 'classified' and this particular problem goes away.)
(If you hadn't guessed, I am in agreement with those above saying they shouldn't be gathering info on citizens...)
If things weren't so friggin screwed up, the answer would be easy - trust the company, and if they do wrong then it's the government's job to pound on them.
Unfortunately, here in the real world, I don't know the best answer.
However, if we are talking proper encryption here, then it's not handing the keys over to anyone - it's letting me have the keys, Google providing a place to store things that even they can't access, and the govt can go sit in a corner and cry about it.
We aren't anywhere near the stage of being able to print a whole phone. Or even the different parts.
We aren't in Diamond Age yet.
At the moment, home 3d printers deal in plastics. And mainly ones that are good at melting, but not great in other ways.
It's also not exactly free to make stuff - just like the ink in your regular printer isn't free. Economies of scale would indicate that depending on complexity of the part, making your own 'pirated' copy could cost you more than buying an official item.
And say we do get to Diamond Age levels, where you have machines creating different molecules on the fly and assembling things from the molecular level (which is what you need to make working electronics in a "printer")
I have a hunch things would be so different in that future that this pirating discussion would be irrelevant.
That sounds like you are a tax evader to me! Or worse yet, a terrorist!
I have no doubt in my mind that there have been several explorations of this very thing. Whether it will come to pass in the next 20 or 30 years, I am not sure.
From the point of view of the government, they have the right to tax any and all transactions between people. They just don't have the tech to enforce it.
Once they can get it together, I think there will be a push to cut down on these 'tax loopholes', which is their favorite language to get people to support getting taxed more.
"A government forced to cover all it's citizens however can't just arbitrary cover healthy citizens bills and not unhealthy citizens, they'd have to do something indirect to effect your behavior to reduce their expenses, like put a 10 cent tax on greasy burgers to make people eat something cheaper and healthier."
Or make large sodas illegal! That's just crazy! It's a good thing we can trust that government won't ever be able to do stuff like that...
Also, you don't HAVE to buy insurance (yet).
Don't get me wrong - I think insurance companies are right behind banks when it comes to bad entities. But both of them are far, far behind the govt. because they take the others' money and look the other way and enable them.
In other words, don't make a false dichotomy of having to like either the govt or the big insurance companies - I don't trust any of 'em.
is starting to get a little annoying. What would be the cost to mine and return an oz of gold from an asteroid?
I have no idea, but my hunch is, a lot. Even after they've been doing it for 20 years.
Somehow I'm not too worried about it blowing the bottom off the gold market. Of course I don't own any gold, but even if I did I wouldn't be too worried about it.
Then again, maybe they'll bring it back 1000 tons at a time. And I'd be able to get that solid gold toilet.
I don't understand this idea that because something is 'hard' (like saying no) or because you really need a job, there needs to be a law protecting you.
Total nonsense. You need to protect yourself. Period.
If you really want the job, then you are making a judgement call that your private stuff is a decent trade for employment. And many people might make that decision happily. In that case, good for them.
I would tell them, 'sorry, can't do that.' And if they didn't hire me because of it, then that's fine - I don't want to work there anyway. No one owes me a job on my own terms.
I'm not saying companies that pull this crap are scummy - they obviously are.
On the post: Hilarious And Ridiculous: Networks Threaten To Pull Channels Off The Air If Aereo & Dish Win Lawsuits
I mean, sure, the Duck Dynasty guys have some kickin' beards. But 2 spots? C'mon people!
On the post: California Court Rules It Illegal To Check Maps On Your Phone While Driving
Re: Re: Re: tons of people being dumb on cell phones
On the post: Yes, The DOJ Thinks It's A Crime When A 12 Year Old Reads The NY Times
Re:
Oh, nm, it doesn't matter anyway.. the courts are already quite happy with upholding things like that.
Obviously the answer is to ask a grownup before going to any web site to check the TOS.
On the post: Intuit Continues To Make Sure Filing Taxes Is Complicated
Re: Re: Slimy, but tax simplification is not good
This one looks at highest and lowest earners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_Mariginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Inc ome_Earners.jpg
Corporate Taxes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Effective_Corporate_Tax_Rate_1947-2011_v2.jpg
High income people, again
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_high-income_effective_tax_rates.png
This is the rate of returns, but says nothing of the actual tax rates.
https://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/File:Estate_Tax_Returns_as_a_Percentage_of_Adult_Deaths,_1982_-_2010.gif
So you are talking about lower tax rates of a minority of the taxpayers in the country.
I am not saying your statement is untrue - I don't know the fact myself. But these links don't back you up.
Also, comparing us to the "rest of the world" is not the argument. This does not apply.
On the post: Florida Homeowner's Association Sues Resident For Critical Blog Comments, Seeks Identity Of Other Commenters
Re: freedom of assembly
If you'd been living somewhere and then, later, someone was able to force you to join a group - then yes, I agree with you 100%. So far I've never heard of anything of the like, though.
On the post: Toronto School Board Spokesperson Sends Police Out To Hassle One Of Its Critics
Re:
Although even more so when it comes to deciphering legal documents, the words you say can be excruciatingly picked apart.
On the post: Police Department Rewards Officer Caught By An Online Pedophile Sting With Full Retirement Benefits
This is why I have a poor opinion of cops in general.
Are all cops pedophiles? No. Are all cops crooked? Probably not.
However, in story after story, when a single cop if found to be bad or do something wrong, he almost always is protected by the others.
Even if they don't do the bad thing themselves, the percentage of cops that are either complicit or cover-up or even just 'look the other way' is way, way too high.
On the post: School District Dumps $2 Million 'Online Textbook' Program After Discovering Some Students Can't Afford Broadband
Re: Profits
There was an outage on the text-book's servers. No school today kids!
The other scary part is that the text-book companies have been dinosaurs for 50 years already. I can't see any story like this without thinking of Richard Feynman
http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm
Not exactly the same situation, but I'm sure some equally shady practices go on to this day concerning how books or systems are put in place.
On the post: New York State Starts Walking Back On Transparency; Grants Gun Owners Exemption From Disclosure Of Public Records
The idea is if the government is allowed to keep things from us, and we aren't allowed to view their data, then there is literally no oversight (and don't give me 'Congress' as an answer..)
The point gets confused, but we need is transparency of the Government. Not transparency of our neighbors and selves. However, a conflict occurs when the government starts collecting lots of data on us.
Unfortunately, this is almost totally moot anyway. The government hides everything it does behind a shield of national security, and precious few seem to care. (That gives me an idea... all they have to do is declare gun registrations 'classified' and this particular problem goes away.)
(If you hadn't guessed, I am in agreement with those above saying they shouldn't be gathering info on citizens...)
On the post: Why Google Should Encrypt Our Email
Re: Re: "the more paranoid"
Unfortunately, here in the real world, I don't know the best answer.
However, if we are talking proper encryption here, then it's not handing the keys over to anyone - it's letting me have the keys, Google providing a place to store things that even they can't access, and the govt can go sit in a corner and cry about it.
On the post: The FISA Amendments Act Is Clearly Unconstitutional; And Congress Doesn't Care
Re: Re: Re:
Everyone knows you get to pick between a turd sandwich and a giant douche-bag.
On the post: Bradley Manning Hearing Shows Military Bosses More Concerned About Media Attention Than Manning's Conditions
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, right... by that dentist...
On the post: Organizations Try To Shame People Into Voting By Revealing How Often They & Their Neighbors Voted
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think this statement misses Zakida's whole point.
On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads
The reaf WTF
On the post: Free Software Foundation Certifies 3D Printer -- And Why That Matters
Re: Incentives for R&D?
We aren't in Diamond Age yet.
At the moment, home 3d printers deal in plastics. And mainly ones that are good at melting, but not great in other ways.
It's also not exactly free to make stuff - just like the ink in your regular printer isn't free. Economies of scale would indicate that depending on complexity of the part, making your own 'pirated' copy could cost you more than buying an official item.
And say we do get to Diamond Age levels, where you have machines creating different molecules on the fly and assembling things from the molecular level (which is what you need to make working electronics in a "printer")
I have a hunch things would be so different in that future that this pirating discussion would be irrelevant.
On the post: Data Mining Exec Pays For Burgers In Cash To Keep His Insurance Company From Knowing His Bad Diet Habits
Re: ...as long as there's that "cash hole"...
I have no doubt in my mind that there have been several explorations of this very thing. Whether it will come to pass in the next 20 or 30 years, I am not sure.
From the point of view of the government, they have the right to tax any and all transactions between people. They just don't have the tech to enforce it.
Once they can get it together, I think there will be a push to cut down on these 'tax loopholes', which is their favorite language to get people to support getting taxed more.
On the post: Data Mining Exec Pays For Burgers In Cash To Keep His Insurance Company From Knowing His Bad Diet Habits
Re:
Or make large sodas illegal! That's just crazy! It's a good thing we can trust that government won't ever be able to do stuff like that...
Also, you don't HAVE to buy insurance (yet).
Don't get me wrong - I think insurance companies are right behind banks when it comes to bad entities. But both of them are far, far behind the govt. because they take the others' money and look the other way and enable them.
In other words, don't make a false dichotomy of having to like either the govt or the big insurance companies - I don't trust any of 'em.
On the post: DailyDirt: Unobtainium Will Save Us!
The gold thing
I have no idea, but my hunch is, a lot. Even after they've been doing it for 20 years.
Somehow I'm not too worried about it blowing the bottom off the gold market. Of course I don't own any gold, but even if I did I wouldn't be too worried about it.
Then again, maybe they'll bring it back 1000 tons at a time. And I'd be able to get that solid gold toilet.
Either way, the future looks cool.
On the post: Should We Outlaw Employers From Asking For Social Networking Logins?
Re: It's absurd.
Why not? No seriously, why not?
There's no way you can honestly show me how someone going in for an interview HAS to take the job if they are offered it.
It may suck if they don't. It may make their life harder, having to look for a new one. But this idea that it's "not an option" is bullshit.
On the post: Should We Outlaw Employers From Asking For Social Networking Logins?
Re: Employers abusing current events
I don't understand this idea that because something is 'hard' (like saying no) or because you really need a job, there needs to be a law protecting you.
Total nonsense. You need to protect yourself. Period.
If you really want the job, then you are making a judgement call that your private stuff is a decent trade for employment. And many people might make that decision happily. In that case, good for them.
I would tell them, 'sorry, can't do that.' And if they didn't hire me because of it, then that's fine - I don't want to work there anyway. No one owes me a job on my own terms.
I'm not saying companies that pull this crap are scummy - they obviously are.
Next >>