zeke5123a
5mo ago
As an aside, international law is a dumb concept when it obligates you to actively help your enemies in a war. It is one thing to say “don’t aggressively torture PoWs.” It is another thing to say “power your enemies stronghold.”
Can not the international law types see the obvious futility of demanding these kinds of “laws?” They invite contempt and thereby prove out the weakness of international law as a concept.
zeke5123a
5mo ago
Look I am more than happy to cut government. I’m with you! However one needs to face reality. Practically even if we cut government, we still need an income tax (at least in the nearish term) and the bureaucracy isn’t primarily due to the IRS
zeke5123a
5mo ago
We need to shrink the deficit and spur growth. If you can do those things, you can make the debt load manageable.
Regardless, your own statement suggests why we need taxes.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
We have a massive amount of debt. Sales tax has its own issues (including buy in). So we need an income tax
zeke5123a
6mo ago
You might be interested in my response down thread. It illustrates some of the complexity IGI-111 is likely unaware exists.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
The Taliban actually have a fighting season (weird I know). The original plan was to pull out when the Taliban weren’t in their fighting season which would’ve meant less chaotic exit (eg abandoning a bunch of perfectly useful tech at Bagaram).
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Also we have seen decades of it all going one way and understand momentum is easy to arrest. We understand time is short and the iron must be struck while it is hot.
America is not responsible for saving the world and even if cutting some funding causes some harm we never had a duty to mitigate that harm in the first place. I would even be open to redressing some of those harms after we get our own house in order; not before.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I dont think any of this is responsive (eg we aren’t getting rid of corporate statutes). We have a federal income tax. You alienated property (call it BlackAcre). It was transferred to a wholly owned corporation. Should you have to pay tax on that alienated property?
The question isn’t “what is your ideal but what is your reality in the day today.”
The above simple question was answered by the government that it ought to be tax deferred (see Section 351). But that causes some complexity.
Another example is what if you and I enter into a partnership. How do we allocate the income from the partnership? What if we have shifting allocations as a business deal?
How do you tax non-US people who earn income in the US?
What do you if someone owns stock A and B. Stock A has BIG of 10 and Stock B has BIL of 10. You want to sell A but don’t want to pay tax. So you sell B. Then a day later you buy Stock B. Did you really crystallize that loss?
How about you receive income but it is subject to a claim of right. Do you have to report that income now or when the claim is settled? If now, what happens what that claim is settled?
I acknowledge that a lot of these problems are problems of an income tax (ie a sales taxes would probably be easier though has its own complexity). And for the vast majority of people who are W-2 holders the above is meaningless. And for the vast majority of those people, the complexity isn’t really a problem since the standard deduction has grown massively so most people take that.
But there are these problems and they are really important problems (big dollar amounts). Choice is required. While simplifying taxes is laudatory, there will be complexity provided you have an income tax.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Let’s say you own business asset A. You want to incorporate it for legal protection. Should you be taxed?
What if you transfer that asset (say it’s worth 10m) to Apple for shares?
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I just don’t have much belief in price discovery where the main buyer is price indifferent
zeke5123a
6mo ago
This appears to be a court martial after the fact within the military courts.
I’m asking for a situation consistent with this hypo where a district court placed an injunction on the executive from pursuing a particular battle etc.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Yes but that is comparing like with unlike. These particular rulings are rather unprecedented and responding by saying that rulings in other areas on other matters restrict the executive are common is not responsive.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I wonder if there is a way to go to a Republican friendly jdx and get an opposite ruling to effectively force a split.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
It appears that the judge’s daughter is at a presidential appointed position at Dept of Ed, a department squarely within the crosshairs of DOGE. So not only is the ruling dubious on constitutional grounds, but there is also a concern that his order directly helps his daughter suggesting a conflict of interest.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
It is pretty unprecedented for a district judge to order such a sweeping injunction that affects a core executive duty / power. All the more so when this is certainly a political question (ie Trump isn’t saying he won’t ever spend money Congress appropriated; he is saying first he needs to understand what it is being spent on because what it is being spent on may not be in line with the congressional grant and/or the grant may be impossible.
Also I don’t think judges have ever said “this particular military operation, or this particular use of prosecutorial discretion, is illegal.” Like can you find one case?
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Yes I agree impeachment should be on the table…for the judge who wrote this absurd TRO. The sole random district court judge is requiring the president to violate his Art II core duty with zero precedent for such a sweeping declaratory TRO. It wouldn’t be unfair to label what the judge is doing as a judicial coup.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Rates went up significantly since the buyout happened. Banks off loading at a very small discount isn’t indicative of anything.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Nine times out of ten the 5,000 word posts aren’t insightful. And easily could’ve been 500 word posts.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
Sure. But France builds at a cost 1/5 as NYC did with second Ave subway
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I think it honestly depends. For example, if we thought the fraud catching systems were already quite strong and the likely fraud was 0.0001% then I wouldn’t advocate putting much in the way of more resources into auditing fraud.
But that doesn’t seem to be our facts. The systems seem a mess so there is no way to know ex ante how much fraud there is.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I live in a community that is probably 50% Indian, 30% East Asian, and balance white. The Indians celebrate Indian holidays but don’t really celebrate American ones (eg July 4th). They are nice to others but really only associate with other Indians. It severely limits the ability to form a cohesive community.
So I’m not sure you are right.
zeke5123a
6mo ago
I hate living in a diverse place. It often makes me feel like an alien living in my own land. And I don’t see it lasting (eg at a certain point ethnic strife often occurs in multicultural places especially when one race is blamed for societal ills)
The steel seizure cases are different. Again SCOTUS decision; was there a TRO?
Also the whole question about the steel seizure cases was whether this was a core power or a secondary power.
More options
Context Copy link