@The_Nybbler's banner p


Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC


User ID: 174


Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC


No bio...


User ID: 174

In New Jersey and many other US states (not California, and I have no idea about Canada), property taxes are NOT based on a percentage of property's assessed value, though they are expressed that way. Instead, a municipal budget is constructed and the revenue required for that budget apportioned among the properties according to their assessed values. Doubling all the property values uniformly without changing the municipal budget would not change property tax; it would halve the tax rate.

I sincerely hope this leads to a wave of resignations within NPR, with everyone saying “Ich bin ein Berliner” as their parting words.

I think this is the wrong end of things. Berliner was the last jelly donut to leave, not the start.

On the one hand, that bridge was crossed and burned a long time ago, so I guess sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Precisely. This is just an attempt by Rufo to (as Alinsky put it) “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” It won't work, probably, because NPR is not just OK with those tweets but finds them an absolute positive.

Then there's a lot of indirect problems, like the existence of the ultrawealthy causing a general sense of unease and unfairness.

Oh, yes, that's certainly a problem that justifies taking away their wealth and giving what survives the process to those who complain. This is the sort of justification I'd expect from a straw villain in some Ayn Rand novel.

There is a bounded amount of things of value

I suppose there's a bound, but there isn't a fixed amount of things of value, which is what your argument relies on.

For the same reason as why you want to cut the top off your power economy by having rule of law and a constitution, presumably.

The analogy makes no sense. An absolute ruler is an absolute ruler because he has power over his subjects; he's directly taking away their autonomy. Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos being wealthy does not rely on making J. Random Janitor poorer.

Bezos's wealth does not cause anyone to be poorer; there's no "strangling" of the bottom of the economy by the top.

Capgains taxes are fine, and even desirable if you want to lower or stabilize the gini coefficient.

And why would you want to cut the top off your economy?

Why should Trump fight at all for a country he knows best as a source of graft for the Bidens?

It's a common mistake, but "misogynistic" does not mean "someone women do not like".

Fails to counter; that claims women care mostly about physical appearance, not that they don't like losers.

By any standard but a circular one (that is, he was popular with women therefore not a loser), I think he was a loser. I mean, he's in and out of jail and/or psych hospitals.

Do you know what women don't like? Losers.

I present you the Parable of Henry.

Absolutely massive protests that erupt every couple of years.

Iran has almost 90 million people. A small minority would be massive. Even assuming the protests weren't stirred by Western intelligence agencies or even by the regime itself to draw out its enemies.

They try to obtain nuke. That is actually good enough reason for regime change or preventive nuclear strike.

No, it isn't, not unless you want the US to actually be the evil hegemon it is often claimed to be.

Few people in Iran supports the current regime.

Why should I believe that?

And if they do reconstitute - you kill them again. Until they are tired of dying

I'm not sure why I, or the United States, should care so much. If they did anything significant enough to the US I can see killing them until whoever replaces them includes "don't fuck with the Great Satan" among their policies, but other than that, such a policy seems pointless.

You only need to summary execute couple of Ayatollah and decimate the revolutionary guard - the people of Iran will do the rest.

Where "the rest" is anoint a few more Ayatollahs and reconstitute the guard, and hate America even more with even better reason?

Dying from something easily preventable is also a stupid way to go.

Depends on whether the cost of that prevention would have been too high. It's easy to prevent death via recreational mountaineering -- don't do it -- but I think you'll find that to be a rather unpopular position among mountaineering enthusiasts. Similarly, it may be easy to stay inside when the sun is out, but the cost of doing so is high regardless.

Why not advise kids to smoke tobacco, too? They probably won't get lung cancer, and the benefits of nicotine are that they won't get fat and will have better focus!

It's a reasonable question to ask, but I think if you added up the pluses and minuses you'd find smoking is a negative on balance. Not just lung cancer but COPD and a host of other diseases which debilitate as well as kill, plus stinking like smoke and having cravings for cigarettes.

But maybe I'm wrong; my mother was a lifelong unrepentant smoker, though it did kill her in the end.

The Israel-Hamas (plus Hezbollah) war is already in part an Israel-Iran proxy war. They didn't so much kick a hornets' nest as overstep a very fuzzy line. And Iran getting its back up over the inviolability of an embassy is pretty amusing for those of us who remember 1979.

Hard to say. Not a lot of movement since 2009, but there's a lot of confounding factors. But we keep getting more and more expensive features added in the name of safety.

The problem is the safetyists have no brakes. Nothing's ever "safe enough".

Seems too small to reliably overwhelm air defenses. Perhaps an attempt to let Israel know that Iran really thinks Israel overstepped the boundaries of this proxy war they've been fighting. Nothing says "cut that out" as sincerely as high explosives, after all.

Looks like it takes effect in 2028. I think it was supposed to be this year.

California has outlawed home generators, which means New York will be next, and then the country. So it's darkness for everyone.

Yep, I've only been to Pittsburgh a few times but the first time (in 1993 or so) I ended up in some decayed industrial area near one of the rivers and had a hell of a time finding my way back. (At night, naturally)

If you put enough density of turbines and solar panels - chances that there won't be enough trough all of the areas are quite slim.

It's rather high. Not only is all this in the Northern Hemisphere (so winters with weak and short sun are correlated), but we frequently get storm systems which cover massive areas of the US and Canada with clouds