Member since January 24, 2013
This user has no shared collections.
View More Collections
Why don't you go browse some
and pick a few to favorite?
commented on Mike Luckovich
about 2 years ago
Nice. Well done.
There’s been a lot of stupid hyperbole on this one, but this one is very good.
commented on Stuart Carlson
about 2 years ago
Ummmm, it’s not rhetoric. The science is clear and we do need to act.
While I am appalled by the theft of these images, there’s a huge difference between a thief stealing private files and the government stealing private files. This kind of false equivalency minimized the huge damage a government spying on its people can do, because the jackasses who stole and posted these pictures can be prosecuted while the government cannot.
Not quite. 401(k)s are intended to take advantage of compound interest. Because you hold all the money and do not pay taxes on it until you take it out, there is more in the pool to compound.
As a result, you have more growth (hopefully) in your account and down the line the government gets more revenue.
Sadly, 401(k)s are largely a failed experiment.
Yeah, take California that is doing better economically and with employment that almost any other state. Damn them.
I agree. That is interesting. Buffet is playing by the rules as they stand, while advocating for the rules to change.
It makes no sense to tie your hands behind your back while the people you are fighting are allowed to have guns. So as long as guns are allowed, you use them.
However, you can still believe that guns shouldn’t be used. And you can also believe that inversions shouldn’t be allowed, and work to make it happen.
Well, they not only want to live “tax free” but they want the benefits, infrastructure and protections that are paid for by taxes.
In other words, these inversions are essentially seeking to freeload on the rest of us.
Corporation benefit mightily from the government resources — educated workforce, cheap postal service, courts and police, roads and bridges, food inspection, investment and bank account insurance, etc. — but don’t want to pay for it.
They are cheap, entitled freeloaders who want to get everything for free. That used to be something the GOP didn’t like — at least if you are an urban minority.
We really should protect our first amendment rights to bear arms, all arms!
After all, why limit it to gunpowder-based arms? We should be allowed to store chemical and biological weapons in our house to throw at intruders if we want! Suitcase nukes for protecting our suburban towns from the urban hordes!
After all, the Constitution doesn’t define “arms” at all, so they are all fair game. I mean, they didn’t have 100 round capacity magazines for weapons that could fire five bullets a second back in 1791 when the Second Amendment was ratified, but we’re allowed to have them! ALL ARMS MUST BE LEGAL TO CARRY IN A CHURCH OR BAR!
Unless you believe the idiocy above, that all arms should be legal, then you believe in arms control. And if you believe in arms control, then we should be able to discuss which arms are allowed and which are not.
Myself, I would limit non-sporting weapons (hunting, target, etc.) to 10 rounds and limit firing speed, require that they be locked separate from their ammo when not in use, and shooters be trained and licensed just like drivers and weapons be registered just like cars.
Unless you plan on armed insurrection or mass murder there are few rational reasons to have more firepower than listed above.
No, the US does not have the highest MARGINAL tax rate for corporations in the world. The marginal tax rate is how much you pay on each additional dollar of income, so it relates to tax brackets and not a set rate.
What the US does have is a high corporate tax rate compared to other countries, but when you factor in subsidies, tax breaks, etc. our taxes aren’t out of whack. It’s just that our tax code is unfair because it advantages some businesses over others, and some markets over others.
Here’s a link to more than two dozen profitable companies that paid no taxes from 200 8 to 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/corporation-tax-rate_n_4855763.html
The issue is that they are not changing their business or moving around the globe. All they are doing is changing an address on a piece of paper in order to reduce their tax burden.
They will continue to take advantage of the resources American tax payers provide, including an educated workforce, roads, police, banking protections, copyright protections, food inspection, safe streets, border patrols, clean and easily accessed water, etc., etc., etc.
But they won’t be paying for it, because they changed an address on a piece of paper. Their stores will still be here, their business will still be here, their employees will still be here, their executives will still be here — but you’ll be paying for it out of your taxes while they’ll be freeloading.
That’s why it’s slimy. And that’s why I won’t eat at BK ever again if they do it.
Copyright © 2016. Universal Uclick, All rights reserved.