USCE Winter 2023: change thread titles constantly, almost on a daily basis

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Winter 2023: change thread titles constantly, almost on a daily basis

«‹›201 »

Ershalim: Sep 22, 2008; Clever Betty

mawarannahr posted:

Is that police wearing a mask?? Shocking and unusual

He is! He's also attempting to signal to the conductor by flashing his light that way. It's subway protocol to try to get the attention of oncoming trains to get them to stop in case of something being wrong at the station. It's not glamorous or exciting, but it's the thing people get trained to do because it's less likely to make a bad situation even worse.

ACAB, of course, but this one isn't being lazy or egregiously aggressive. I think this one is getting attention because of the massive overspending on police (and NYC metro police in particular), but personally I would prefer that more police didn't engage with the public much or at all rather than what they normally do.

# ? Jan 21, 2023 22:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 8, 2024 23:12

Vahakyla: May 3, 2013

mawarannahr posted:

Is that police wearing a mask?? Shocking and unusual

Dunno what�s it about NYPD but they wear masks a lot.

# ? Jan 21, 2023 22:16

Neo Rasa: Mar 8, 2007; Everyone should play DUKE games.

Ershalim posted:

He is! He's also attempting to signal to the conductor by flashing his light that way. It's subway protocol to try to get the attention of oncoming trains to get them to stop in case of something being wrong at the station. It's not glamorous or exciting, but it's the thing people get trained to do because it's less likely to make a bad situation even worse.

ACAB, of course, but this one isn't being lazy or egregiously aggressive. I think this one is getting attention because of the massive overspending on police (and NYC metro police in particular), but personally I would prefer that more police didn't engage with the public much or at all rather than what they normally do.

Yeah it's more this here, the sheer volume of cops they have milling around the subway doing nothing now is insane, they even periodically add to the platform announcements that they're there because there's so little for them to do the MTA has to basically advertise that they're around to do stuff.

# ? Jan 21, 2023 22:21

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

Announcing that there are cops nearby was Eric Adams� big plan to counter the narrative of subway crime being out of control

I don�t know if they actually deployed more cops or just started making the announcements

# ? Jan 21, 2023 22:38

AlternateNu: May 5, 2005; ドーナツダメ！

Regardless on whether NYPD is actually on the platform, conductors will announce at every stop if there is a precinct or metro police office at the station.

# ? Jan 21, 2023 23:00

Old James: Nov 20, 2003; Wait a sec. I don't know an Old James!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Yeah, I'm not actually sure why he decided to make such a big deal about it.

Why would a politician like attention? It's a mystery.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 00:14

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Vahakyla posted:

Dunno what�s it about NYPD but they wear masks a lot.

Now that they're not not wearing them to stick it to the liberals, they may have recognized that it's a great way to hide your identity when you're doing copcrimes.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 00:17

Tibalt: May 14, 2017; What, drawn, and talk of peace! I hate the word, As I hate hell, all Montagues, and thee

COVID has also been the number one cop killer for a few years now, that might have made a bit of a dent.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 00:43

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

Tibalt posted:

COVID has also been the number one cop killer for a few years now, that might have made a bit of a dent.

Maybe it�s to guard against fentanyl inhalation? That seems to be a much bigger perceived threat.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:04

Zotix: Aug 14, 2011

Lmao more docs found at Bidens home. Unreal.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1616949467483148288?s=20&t=GlLHzi8pk0n3vOWvSOQ3Jw

Zotix fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Jan 22, 2023

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:05

Wrex Ruckus: Aug 24, 2015

Zotix posted:

Lmao more docs found at Bidens home. Unreal.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1616949467483148288?s=20&t=GlLHzi8pk0n3vOWvSOQ3Jw

I'm imagining investigators opening kitchen cabinets and a comical amount of classified documents falling out.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:12

-Blackadder-: Jan 2, 2007; Game....Blouses.

New NYT Deep dive on the SCOTUS Leak investigation.

Staff are less than happy campers.

https://twitter.com/jodikantor/status/1616888876064276482

quote:

Inside the Supreme Court Inquiry: Seized Phones, Affidavits and Distrust

An investigation of the abortion opinion leak was meant to right the institution amid a slide in public confidence. Instead, employees say, it deepened suspicions and caused disillusionment.

By Jodi Kantor

Jan. 21, 2023
Updated 2:14 p.m. ET

Last spring and summer, employees of the Supreme Court were drawn into an investigation that turned into an uncomfortable awakening.

As the court marshal�s office looked into who had leaked the draft opinion of the decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion, law clerks who had secured coveted perches at the top of the judiciary scrambled for legal advice and navigated quandaries like whether to surrender their personal cellphones to investigators.

The �court family� soon realized that its sloppy security might make it impossible to ever identify the culprit: 82 people, in addition to the justices, had access to the draft opinion. �Burn bags� holding sensitive documents headed for destruction sat around for days. Internal doors swung open with numerical codes that were shared widely and went unchanged for months.

Perhaps most painful, some employees found themselves questioning the integrity of the institution they had pledged to serve, according to interviews with almost two dozen current and former employees, former law clerks, advisers to last year�s clerkship class and others close to them, who provided previously undisclosed details about the investigation.

Inside the court, justices are treated with such day-to-day deference that junior aides assist them in putting on their black robes. As staff members were grilled, some grew concerned about the fairness of the inquiry, worried that the nine most powerful people at the court were not being questioned rigorously like everyone else.

The investigation was an attempt by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. to right the institution and its image after a grievous breach and slide in public trust. Instead, it may have lowered confidence inside the court and out.

On Thursday, the court issued a 20-page report disclosing that the marshal�s monthslong search for the leaker had been fruitless, and detailing embarrassing gaps in internal policies and security. While noting that 97 workers had been formally interviewed, the report did not say whether the justices or their spouses had been.

Public reaction was scathing: �Not even a sentence explaining why they were or weren�t questioned,� tweeted Sean Davis, co-founder of The Federalist, a conservative magazine.

A day later, the court was forced to issue a second statement saying that the marshal had in fact conferred with the justices, but on very different terms from others at the institution. Lower-level employees had been formally interrogated, recorded, pressed to sign affidavits denying any involvement and warned that they could lose their jobs if they failed to answer questions fully, according to interviews and the report.

In contrast, conversations with the justices had been a two-way �iterative process� in which they asked as well as answered questions, the marshal, Gail A. Curley, wrote. She had seen no need for them to sign affidavits, she said.

Instead of putting the matter to rest, Friday�s statement heightened concerns about a double standard for justices.

�They weren�t subjected to the same level of scrutiny,� said one court worker on Friday, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the court�s confidentiality rules. �It�s hard to imagine any of them suffering meaningful consequences even if they were implicated in the leak.�

Internal examinations can build or sap an organization�s authority, said Glenn Fine, a former inspector general for the Justice Department who has conducted such inquiries, and more recently, has argued that the court needs a similar figure.

�Leak investigations are a double-edged sword,� Mr. Fine said in an interview. A thorough investigation can be a deterrent, but �an investigation that doesn�t solve a leak may embolden more leakers in the future.�

Failing to fully scrutinize the justices �just completely undermines the court�s credibility,� said Mark S. Zaid, a lawyer who often handles government investigations. �It sends a message of superiority that does not exist under the eyes of the law.�

Besides, �justices have a long history of being the ultimate source of leaks,� Aaron Tang, a law professor and former clerk to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, wrote in an Opinion essay in The New York Times.

In interviews, some employees said the leak and investigation further tainted the atmosphere inside a court that had already grown tense with disagreement. The leak spurred finger pointing, they said, with many conservatives convinced that a liberal had engineered the breach and vice versa. Just as the justices have grown more divided, so has their staff, eroding trust. Voices are more hushed now, the employees said, and doors that used to be open are closed.

Interrogating the staff

In December 2021, after an early vote by the justices, word of the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women�s Health Organization began to circulate in the court. The new conservative supermajority was about to overturn Roe v. Wade, removing a right in force for nearly a half-century. Wrenching for some on the staff and welcome for others, the outcome would have to be closely guarded by the court for six months.

In February, the draft opinion was emailed to a list of 70 clerks and employees; it eventually was seen by a dozen more, the report said. Some employees discussed the results with confidants in the building, and a few later admitted that they told their spouses, according to the report.

But the publication of the full draft opinion in Politico on May 2 was a shock felt almost physically at the court: Protesters roared outside the building, so loud they could be heard from some bathrooms. Over the years, information had occasionally dribbled out about pending decisions. But the court�s opinion was not yet final, and the leak seemed calculated to interfere with deliberations: �a grave assault on the judicial process,� as the marshal�s report would put it.

By the time the chief justice summoned the three dozen clerks for a mandatory meeting about the breach, many of the pedigreed young lawyers were already worried. On the internet, accusers on the right were attacking the liberal justices� clerks, posting names and photos and wild whodunit theories. One clerk had been quoted in a Politico article years before. Another had a master�s degree in gender studies, had written about reproductive rights and was married to a reporter. The tweets went viral, with tens of thousands of likes. (Later, the court�s investigators found �nothing to substantiate� those accusations.)

The chief had assigned the investigation to Ms. Curley, the marshal, whose best-known task was crying �Oyez, oyez, oyez!� as justices entered the courtroom. She was a respected former Army lawyer, but her division had little of the investigative muscle of other government agencies, no subpoena power and a staff only partly devoted to security. Others on her team dealt with court administrative tasks like staffing events and handling mail.

But Chief Justice Roberts was a staunch defender of the court�s independence, reluctant to let outsiders interfere. �The Judiciary�s power to manage its internal affairs,� he had written months before, �insulates courts from inappropriate political influence and is crucial to preserving public trust in its work as a separate and co-equal branch of government.�

As interviews of clerks began, a dilemma emerged. No one wanted to seem uncooperative, as if they had something to hide. The court�s written code of conduct states that the justices �expect and require complete loyalty from their own law clerks and the clerks of all other Justices.� Rifts between a clerk and his or her justice could have immediate and lasting implications, according to interviews with those who have held the one-year positions as well as advisers to last year�s class. The job rested on intimacy with justices, the ability to channel the bosses� voices and views in drafting opinions.

The advantages accrued in one year at the court can compound for decades. For those who move on to law firms, the signing bonuses can be as high as $450,000, according to several lawyers at firms that recruit and hire them. The justices have powerful alumni networks that include reunions. A justice�s endorsement can be decisive for a federal judgeship or a law professor post. Many clerks join appellate practices, where, after a mandatory short break from court business, they spend the rest of their careers being paid handsomely to read and influence the justices� minds.

But the marshal�s search was broad. The interview questions, and the affidavits the clerks were asked to sign, were sweeping, and lying to federal investigators was a crime. Investigators collected the clerks� court-issued electronic devices and requested their personal ones. The group feared what one person called �spillage� � outed details, like stray comments about justices or cases, that had nothing to do with the leak but could prove damaging.

The request to hand over personal cellphones caused some to seek legal counsel. It is unclear the degree to which clerks agreed to share the physical devices. But the report said that employees �voluntarily provided call and text detail records and billing statements,� suggesting that at least some may have reached a compromise: Investigators could view records and numbers but did not have access to other personal material.

The Inquiry Expands, and Deflates

In June and July, the inquiry proceeded to other workers, few of whom had the connections or potential earning power of the clerks. Some were long-serving employees who had protected the court�s secrets for years; others were just out of college.

As they sat for interviews, a stenographer and an audio technician captured every word. Some conversations were short and cursory, according to some who were questioned; others were far more detailed. A few employees were brought back for repeat interrogations, according to the report. The marshal�s office interviewed almost 100 workers in all, the report noted. Even the marshal�s aides, junior employees who have limited access to draft opinions, were questioned.

In the course of the investigation, the marshal�s office and other employees realized just how lax the court�s rules and protections had been. The question of whether court material could be brought home was fuzzy. Though employees weren�t supposed to tell anyone about the justices� decisions, some told their spouses. For all its majesty, the Supreme Court is a porous and somewhat antiquated organization, lacking the armor of other government bodies that handle sensitive information.

In a May 2022 speech, Justice Clarence Thomas described how the leak had changed the atmosphere at the court. �You begin to look over your shoulder,� he said. �It�s like kind of an infidelity. You can explain it, but you can�t undo it.�

But in interviews, employees raised questions about whether the justices themselves have contributed to a decline in trust inside and outside the court.

Periodically, employees receive a stern memo reminding them that they may not participate in partisan political activities � no events, fund-raising, bumper stickers or statements on social media. So some bristled when four justices attended a 40th-anniversary dinner for the Federalist Society, an influential conservative group that focuses on the judiciary, in November.

Last spring, Justice Thomas declined to recuse himself from cases involving attempts to overthrow the 2020 election, even though Virginia Thomas, his wife, had been involved in those efforts. Months later, a former leader of the anti-abortion movement wrote to the chief justice to report an alleged earlier breach, of a 2014 contraception decision, that he said stemmed from a donor�s meal with Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. and his wife. The court never responded.

In recent months, as the court has completed its report, new clerks have taken their places inside the chambers. Security is tightening. Further protocol changes are promised. And with the release of the report, a growing recognition has taken hold, some employees say: The best chance of understanding who leaked the most consequential decision in generations, and what that person was trying to achieve, is fading away.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:21

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

I love that we�re just going to pretend now that it wasn�t leaked by the conservatives

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:36

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Or that the reason the Supreme Court has lost credibility has to do with the leak and not with the fact that the leak exposed.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 01:37

Eric Cantonese: Dec 21, 2004; You should hear my accent.

Zotix posted:

Lmao more docs found at Bidens home. Unreal.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1616949467483148288?s=20&t=GlLHzi8pk0n3vOWvSOQ3Jw

6 documents dating back his Senate and VP days. I can't wait for the House investigation to keep churning this meaningless bullshit into some unholy butter.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 02:20

Mooseontheloose: May 13, 2003

Eric Cantonese posted:

6 documents dating back his Senate and VP days. I can't wait for the House investigation to keep churning this meaningless bullshit into some unholy butter.

Though this might turn into a hilarious every member of congress/senate is going to get investigated by the FBI.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 03:49

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

Mooseontheloose posted:

Though this might turn into a hilarious every member of congress/senate is going to get investigated by the FBI.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 03:57

Old James: Nov 20, 2003; Wait a sec. I don't know an Old James!

Wrex Ruckus posted:

I'm imagining investigators opening kitchen cabinets and a comical amount of classified documents falling out.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 05:08

Youth Decay: Aug 18, 2015

I bet Dubya still has classified docs somewhere on his old ranch. He was at the ranch for like half his presidency and claimed that he was able to do most of his work from there so we know he brought lots of stuff home with him. Has anyone ever checked?

# ? Jan 22, 2023 05:12

James Garfield: May 5, 2012; Am I a manipulative abuser in real life, or do I just roleplay one on the Internet for fun? You decide!

Mooseontheloose posted:

Though this might turn into a hilarious every member of congress/senate is going to get investigated by the FBI.

Matt Gaetz will accidentally incriminate himself during the congressional investigation of Hunter Biden's penis

# ? Jan 22, 2023 05:24

Push El Burrito: May 9, 2006; Soiled Meat

Youth Decay posted:

I bet Dubya still has classified docs somewhere on his old ranch. He was at the ranch for like half his presidency and claimed that he was able to do most of his work from there so we know he brought lots of stuff home with him. Has anyone ever checked?

Yeah the only reason so many are being found now is that they're looking for them and Biden is openly cooperating. I'm sure every president has some classified poo poo tucked away.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 07:24

nine-gear crow: Aug 10, 2013

Push El Burrito posted:

Yeah the only reason so many are being found now is that they're looking for them and Biden is openly cooperating. I'm sure every president has some classified poo poo tucked away.

I'd also wager that the majority of times those documents wound up in those places were either unintentional or unknowing mixups or a result of casual negligence and ignorance. Trump is the only one I can see just straight up ordering whole file cabinets of documents taken out the door with him as he vacated the White House purely because he wanted to keep them and possibly sell them.

I could also see Cheney doing something like that. He'd stuff a bunch of classified documents down his shirt and walk out the door with them once his clearance had expired because he felt entitled to hold on to them or they were evidence of whatever hinkey poo poo he was up to and needed to hide somehow. He's a fucker like that.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 08:18

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

It's literally this

https://twitter.com/Teri_careforall/status/1617021858225991680

# ? Jan 22, 2023 10:08

Youth Decay: Aug 18, 2015

nine-gear crow posted:

I'd also wager that the majority of times those documents wound up in those places were either unintentional or unknowing mixups or a result of casual negligence and ignorance. Trump is the only one I can see just straight up ordering whole file cabinets of documents taken out the door with him as he vacated the White House purely because he wanted to keep them and possibly sell them.

I could also see Cheney doing something like that. He'd stuff a bunch of classified documents down his shirt and walk out the door with them once his clearance had expired because he felt entitled to hold on to them or they were evidence of whatever hinkey poo poo he was up to and needed to hide somehow. He's a fucker like that.

Cheney probably has docs from Watergate.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 13:25

BIG-DICK-BUTT-FUCK: Jan 26, 2016; by Fluffdaddy

nine-gear crow posted:

I'd also wager that the majority of times those documents wound up in those places were either unintentional or unknowing mixups or a result of casual negligence and ignorance. Trump is the only one I can see just straight up ordering whole file cabinets of documents taken out the door with him as he vacated the White House purely because he wanted to keep them and possibly sell them.

I could also see Cheney doing something like that. He'd stuff a bunch of classified documents down his shirt and walk out the door with them once his clearance had expired because he felt entitled to hold on to them or they were evidence of whatever hinkey poo poo he was up to and needed to hide somehow. He's a fucker like that.

Agreed. Democrats mishandle classified documents unintentionally or unknowingly, Like A Sir. Republicans steal and sell classified documents because they are fucktarded.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jan 22, 2023 15:24

-Blackadder-: Jan 2, 2007; Game....Blouses.

At least CNN cuts to other news on occasion.
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1617168074636943362

# ? Jan 22, 2023 16:05

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

morothar posted:

You don�t spend your entire income on things that are subject to sales taxes. If e.g. half your income goes towards rent, you�re now paying an effective rate of 15%.

Sales taxes at similar levels are also not unheard of - some EU countries have VAT in the 20ies.

The reason it�s a problem is that�s it�s regressive as gently caress. Unless your average federal income tax rate is above 15-20%, this is a tax hike.

I'm all in favor of simplifying the tax code somehow but this Fair Tax poo poo and, worse, the people in my income bracket who support it, infuriate me. I can't gather why so many voters like this idea and it's a really stupid and elementary way of thinking about "fair".

Because, by and large, everyone pays the same amount for food, gas, utilities and, even to some extent, cars, clothes, child care and what have you. Things you simply must buy to live. Cost of living expenses. Trouble is that for someone like me, the percentage of that might be, let's say, 65% of my income. For someone making six figures or more, that percentage would be much much lower.

It's a horrible idea that idiot voters think is logical because it seems fair if you only think about it for 10 seconds.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 16:32

Kanos: Sep 6, 2006; was there a time when speedwagon didn't get trolled

BiggerBoat posted:

I'm all in favor of simplifying the tax code somehow but this Fair Tax poo poo and, worse, the people in my income bracket who support it, infuriate me. I can't gather why so many voters like this idea and it's a really stupid and elementary way of thinking about "fair".

Because, by and large, everyone pays the same amount for food, gas, utilities and, even to some extent, cars, clothes, child care and what have you. Things you simply must buy to live. Cost of living expenses. Trouble is that for someone like me, the percentage of that might be, let's say, 65% of my income. For someone making six figures or more, that percentage would be much much lower.

It's a horrible idea that idiot voters think is logical because it seems fair if you only think about it for 10 seconds.

I've noticed when reading people writing in favor of Fair Tax poo poo that they get caught up in the idea that flat taxes are "fair" because they get stuck on big ostentatious luxury purchases. Oh, that billionaire is going to have to pay 30% on their 500 million dollar megayacht while the working class won't have any purchases of that magnitude so it evens out. They have no real concept of ratio of income to necessities unless you directly explain the concept to them, and even then they are frequently resistant because "Jeff Bezos is paying the same 30% on his Big Mac as I am, that's fair".

There's also the beloved and enduring idea that I see from a lot of these people that a flat tax would be obviously written to exempt basic necessities like food and gas for some reason, because in their head they like the idea of a simple and "fair" tax code but don't want to mentally grapple with the idea that they'd be paying like $9 for a dozen eggs.

Kanos fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Jan 22, 2023

# ? Jan 22, 2023 17:44

smackfu: Jun 7, 2004

Also, one of the reasons the tax code is not simple is because we use it to manipulate people into doing things. Like home ownership, and saving for retirements, and holding investments for longer than a year. Once you make it flat, you give up all that leverage.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 18:02

BRJurgis: Aug 15, 2007; Well I hear the thunder roll, I feel the cold winds blowing...
But you won't find me there, 'cause I won't go back again...
While you're on smoky roads, I'll be out in the sun...
Where the trees still grow, where they count by one...

Yeah it's so frustrating... People frequently talk about moving away from here in the northeast (or even make good on it), to go down south or otherwise to states without as much property or income tax. There is little understanding of the dynamics we're discussing (that spread the tax burden to the masses to the benefit of the rich, nevermind the gutted social services), because of that underlying "inconvenienced millionaire/gubmint taxing me on my stuff" vibe. Usually when you explain that as working class folks they'd be getting hosed, their desire to be in a different class comes to the forefront and they simply identify as somebody who is/would be wealthy if not for their present taxes.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 18:38

Paracaidas: Sep 24, 2016; Consistently Tedious!

smackfu posted:

Also, one of the reasons the tax code is not simple is because we use it to manipulate people into doing things. Like home ownership, and saving for retirements, and holding investments for longer than a year. Once you make it flat, you give up all that leverage.

The combination of a flat tax and a Republican president with the recent FTC policy change really would spell the end of the neoliberal order.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 18:47

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

-Blackadder- posted:

At least CNN cuts to other news on occasion.
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1617168074636943362

This will continue until we ban guns. There's no good reason for people to own murder machines, and until enough people see that, we are just going to see tragedy after tragedy and slaughter after slaughter.

There's extremely little chance that we will see this in my lifetime in the US as it stands. This (along with Citizens United) is one of the main things that make me seriously consider leaving the US, or think it'd be better to balkanize and start anew.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 18:53

lobster shirt: Jun 14, 2021

BRJurgis posted:

Yeah it's so frustrating... People frequently talk about moving away from here in the northeast (or even make good on it), to go down south or otherwise to states without as much property or income tax. There is little understanding of the dynamics we're discussing (that spread the tax burden to the masses to the benefit of the rich, nevermind the gutted social services), because of that underlying "inconvenienced millionaire/gubmint taxing me on my stuff" vibe. Usually when you explain that as working class folks they'd be getting hosed, their desire to be in a different class comes to the forefront and they simply identify as somebody who is/would be wealthy if not for their present taxes.

its funny when people move to texas expecting a big tax break and get surprised at how high property taxes are

# ? Jan 22, 2023 18:56

Mooseontheloose: May 13, 2003

lobster shirt posted:

its funny when people move to texas expecting a big tax break and get surprised at how high property taxes are

People moving from Massachusetts's to New Hampshire experience this a lot.

Also, we all know that the flat tax will get all sorts of rich people exemptions. It's a dumb idea that the media will parrot because of its "simplicity." I guess the only lucky thing we got here is that you can't complain about run away inflation and the propose inflating prices by 30%.

I guess, in theory I am not against a national American VAT but only in conjunction with income/wealth tax reforms that actually get rich people to pay taxes.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:00

morothar: Dec 21, 2005

Mooseontheloose posted:

People moving from Massachusetts's to New Hampshire experience this a lot.

Also, we all know that the flat tax will get all sorts of rich people exemptions. It's a dumb idea that the media will parrot because of its "simplicity." I guess the only lucky thing we got here is that you can't complain about run away inflation and the propose inflating prices by 30%.

I guess, in theory I am not against a national American VAT but only in conjunction with income/wealth tax reforms that actually get rich people to pay taxes.

You wouldn�t even see a technical increase in prices, as sales tax is calculated at point of sale, and is separate from price. Not like this is Europe where VAT is included in the price.

I know, makes no difference to the consumer; but I doubt it�ll show as inflation, or the Bureau of Labor Stats will correct for it.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:08

AtomikKrab: Jul 17, 2010; Keep on GOP rolling rolling rolling rolling.

morothar posted:

You wouldn�t even see a technical increase in prices, as sales tax is calculated at point of sale, and is separate from price. Not like this is Europe where VAT is included in the price.

I know, makes no difference to the consumer; but I doubt it�ll show as inflation, or the Bureau of Labor Stats will correct for it.

Like does the GOP honestly think they will win people over by making say a 9.99 take out meal which with my current state sales tax ends up being 10.59, into $13.59 after taxes? They would be ripped into pieces

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:34

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

lobster shirt posted:

its funny when people move to texas expecting a big tax break and get surprised at how high property taxes are

Florida as well.

HEY there's not state taxes there!

WEll, get ready for property taxes if you can afford to own a home.

And also let me tell you a little something about insuring it.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:37

Kanos: Sep 6, 2006; was there a time when speedwagon didn't get trolled

Mooseontheloose posted:

People moving from Massachusetts's to New Hampshire experience this a lot.

Also, we all know that the flat tax will get all sorts of rich people exemptions. It's a dumb idea that the media will parrot because of its "simplicity." I guess the only lucky thing we got here is that you can't complain about run away inflation and the propose inflating prices by 30%.

I guess, in theory I am not against a national American VAT but only in conjunction with income/wealth tax reforms that actually get rich people to pay taxes.

A national American VAT except without things like functional public healthcare that the high European VATs exist to fund.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:42

bird food bathtub: Aug 9, 2003; College Slice

The part about classified documents that is being very purposefully misrepresented by assholes like Fox is that the actual fuckup isn't generally what gets you in trouble, because it's usually just a fuckup. It's the coverup, or lying afterwards, or pretending it didn't happen. There are entire offices dedicated to tracking down sources, locations, and potential end points of accidentally mishandled classified information. That is their entire job.

When these kinds of things happen, they are called in to find out where it came from, what it contains, and where it might have ended up. poo poo happens, and as long as you're up front about what happened and help them in that investigation the end result is probably an administrative note in your file, some re-training, and as long as you keep your poo poo together in the future and don't do it again everybody moves on. If you lie to them, cover up what happened, or demonstrate you're doing it on purpose then the shitwinds start blowing. You're stopping them from finding out what the scope of risk is so they can't accurately protect the information.

One of the above is Trump, and one of the above is not.

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 8, 2024 23:12

Zotix: Aug 14, 2011

bird food bathtub posted:

The part about classified documents that is being very purposefully misrepresented by assholes like Fox is that the actual fuckup isn't generally what gets you in trouble, because it's usually just a fuckup. It's the coverup, or lying afterwards, or pretending it didn't happen. There are entire offices dedicated to tracking down sources, locations, and potential end points of accidentally mishandled classified information. That is their entire job.

When these kinds of things happen, they are called in to find out where it came from, what it contains, and where it might have ended up. poo poo happens, and as long as you're up front about what happened and help them in that investigation the end result is probably an administrative note in your file, some re-training, and as long as you keep your poo poo together in the future and don't do it again everybody moves on. If you lie to them, cover up what happened, or demonstrate you're doing it on purpose then the shitwinds start blowing. You're stopping them from finding out what the scope of risk is so they can't accurately protect the information.

One of the above is Trump, and one of the above is not.

It doesn't matter. One declassified the documents the other admitted to having classified documents(a crime!).

# ? Jan 22, 2023 19:58

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE Winter 2023: change thread titles constantly, almost on a daily basis

«‹›201 »