Funny events in anti-woke world

[tstorm823]

Only one state, Virginia, places this limit later than the UK, at 25 weeks in comparison to 24 in the UK.

7 states and DC have no limit at all. Eighteen more have no number listed, just a vague reference to viability. You missed literally half the states in your research.

 

[tstorm823]

Hah, very good.

Fact remains, though: the super-rich pay less in 90% of the US, and far, far less in a lot of it. The poor pay more, since not only is the standard deduction significantly less than our personal allowance, but you also have to exclude yourself from other deductions in order to take it.

8% less at most, as compared to the 20% you started out claiming, and an average of less than 3% less for the super rich. Meanwhile, the median income is paying more in the UK. And also you have a 20% VAT tax.

Ignoring the fact that you said abortion is illegal in the UK.

I said illegal with exceptions from the beginning. Which is factually the case.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

It's meant to be given out and used under care of a nurse. Who will hopefully get them the help they need to get them off addictions. You known, as Geraldo fumbled over

You know when you worry about people being cancelled and them being reduced to nothing? This is the example of what you are worried about. People with addictions have been cancelled so hard that even this minimalistic help is seen as bad. I know drug users who work full time and usually the best workers. Never stolen anything or hurt anyone. Most user fall into this category. They wouldn't generally tell anyone about what they do in the off time because all drug users get cancelled. (Well, unless you're rich and can turn it into a character trait.)

But hey, don't worry about evidence. Just insult people so they be put on the bottom of society

Well it's not going to be the perfectly upstanding citizens whose addiction hasn't cause their life to collapse who will need new crack pipes on the grounds of hygiene because they're sharing it round with so many others is it now?

You know what would be better? offering some program to help get them off it or some of the programs being trialled with replacement substances etc.

 

[Silvanus]

8% less at most, as compared to the 20% you started out claiming, and an average of less than 3% less for the super rich. Meanwhile, the median income is paying more in the UK. And also you have a 20% VAT tax.

I recognised the 20% error straight away in the next post and copped to it, which is a lot more than you've done with the straight-up abortion error you made below.

And 8% is a fucking lot. No state income taxes apply in seven states, including one of the very largest.

I said illegal with exceptions from the beginning. Which is factually the case.

"Exceptions" which cover... the vast majority of cases.

61 cases in a decade in the UK. 200,000 carried out in one year in the UK. If you think that situation can be described as "illegal with exceptions", then I don't know what to say. And we have Republicans pursuing restrictions so strict they would essentially prevent people from carrying out abortions after the point at which people usually find out they're even pregnant.

 

[Agema]

I would like a discussion about what makes her uncomfortable about trans kids. Like, what specifically they are doing

Thank god she's a former teacher rather than current. She should certainly not be permitted to teach ever again.

 

[Cheetodust]

I would like a discussion about what makes her uncomfortable about trans kids. Like, what specifically they are doing

I like how she completely froze after she realised she said the quiet bit out loud. "Fuck! I just explicitly admitted I want to bully children."

 

[Agema]

I like how she completely froze after she realised she said the quiet bit out loud. "Fuck! I just explicitly admitted I want to bully children."

"Bullying is character-building. Sure, a chunk of kids will become depressed, anxious, even traumatised and have their lives adversely affected maybe for the rest of their lives. But they're just the weak ones, and we need to separate the wheat from the chaff. It worked for me, and I am going to use my advantages to make absolutely sure that my kids are the ones doing the bullying."

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

Trump backer, 4 others charged with voter fraud in Wisconsin

A supporter of former President Donald Trump who said authorities should root out voter fraud is among five people charged with election fraud by a Republican district attorney who is running for Wisconsin attorney general.

www.snopes.com

All that looking for voter fraud finally yields results after all this time, hoo ra! Checkmate, libtardigrades!

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A supporter of former President Donald Trump who said authorities should root out voter fraud is among five people who were charged Thursday with election fraud by a Republican district attorney who’s running for Wisconsin attorney general.

All five voters, including a homeless person, improperly listed a post office box number at a UPS store as their address, rather than a residential address as is required under Wisconsin law, said Fond du Lac County District Attorney Eric Toney.

That brings the number of people charged with election fraud during the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin to 10, including seven in Fond du Lac County. Three of the five people charged cast ballots in the 2020 election.

Toney said he hoped the charges would serve to educate voters about the law requiring them to list a residential address when registering to vote. In response to a question about whether this would fuel false claims of widespread election fraud, Toney said that was not the intent.

“It is clear that would have had no impact on any election results about who would have won the race,” Toney said. “It has nothing to do with that type of argument.”


In fact, one of the people charged indicated she had voted for Trump and told investigators to look into cheating because “they took it away from Trump,” according to the complaint.

Another person charged who did not vote in 2020 “appeared very apologetic upon learning that he could not register to vote with a PO Box,” the complaint said. Another man who didn’t vote said he was living out of his truck when he registered and used the post office box because he could use that on his driver’s license.

Voters in Wisconsin do not register by political party, so there is no way of knowing how many of those charged are Republicans or Democrats.

President Joe Biden won Wisconsin by just under 21,000 votes out of more than 3.2 million cast. The outcome has withstood recounts, lawsuits, and multiple reviews. An Associated Press review in battleground states also found no widespread fraud.

The issue of voters listing post office boxes when registering to vote, rather than where they live, was also raised in La Crosse County following the 2020 election. However, the district attorney there decided not to press charges after determining the voters did not intend to break the law.

But Toney, when explaining why he decided to bring charges, said ignorance of the law is no excuse.

“This is an important opportunity for education on this issue,” Toney said. He said he hoped filing charges would lead to fewer criminal referrals that take time and resources away from police and district attorneys who should instead be focused on fighting violent crime.

One of the people charged was homeless but should have listed any kind of address, like the location of a park bench, rather than a post office box number, Toney said. A married couple who were charged were traveling around the state in an RV and could have listed the address of a campground where they stay, he said.

The five people were each charged with a Class I felony, which is punishable by up to 3 ½ years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Toney is running for attorney general and faces former state Rep. Adam Jarchow in the Aug. 9 Republican primary. The winner will advance to face Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul in November.

 

[tstorm823]

I recognised the 20% error straight away in the next post and copped to it, which is a lot more than you've done with the straight-up abortion error you made below.

You know, I made an error talking about gun control here, and I not only admitted to it, I conceded the point. You got your facts wrong on this multiple times, and admitted the error both times, but you just won't let the facts impact your overall position. The income tax systems are pretty darn close, at $15,000 you pay more here, but at $30,000 you pay more there. A billionaire in Alaska pays less than the UK, who pays less than a billionaire in California. Yet you still maintain there's a huge difference. That's not admitting the error in a meaningful sense.

If I made an error on abortion, I'd admit it.

"Exceptions" which cover... the vast majority of cases.

61 cases in a decade in the UK. 200,000 carried out in one year in the UK. If you think that situation can be described as "illegal with exceptions", then I don't know what to say. And we have Republicans pursuing restrictions so strict they would essentially prevent people from carrying out abortions after the point at which people usually find out they're even pregnant.

I didn't describe the situation as legal with exceptions based on statistics, that literally the law there. You can't get an abortion at all without 2 doctors agreeing to the exception. But while we are on the subject, did you know that a bill to lower the gestational limit (outside serious health issues) in the UK to 12 months has been proposed. That at one point, the number was 28, now it's 24, and a bill to get it down to 20 or 18, I forget precisely, was voted for by most of the Conservatives? Which, funny enough, would put you closer in line to Europe.

I got Saelune on board with this once, I know I can get you. People act like the US should be more like Europe, but they're basically talking about healthcare. When Republicans try and match Europe on corporate taxes or abortion restrictions, they suddenly forget to care about the rest of the world, and keep on calling the US super right wing.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senators-cia-has-secret-program-that-collects-american-data/2022/02/10/017b6932-8ad8-11ec-838f-0cfdf69cce3c_story.html

WASHINGTON — The CIA has a secret, undisclosed data repository that includes information collected about Americans, two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee said. While neither the agency nor lawmakers would disclose specifics about the data, the senators alleged the CIA had long hidden details about the program from the public and Congress.

Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico sent a letter to top intelligence officials calling for more details about the program to be declassified. Large parts of the letter, which was sent in April 2021 and declassified Thursday, and documents released by the CIA were blacked out. Wyden and Heinrich said the program operated “outside the statutory framework that Congress and the public believe govern this collection.”

There have long been concerns about what information the intelligence community collects domestically, driven in part by previous violations of Americans’ civil liberties. The CIA and National Security Agency have a foreign mission and are generally barred from investigating Americans or U.S. businesses. But the spy agencies’ sprawling collection of foreign communications often snares Americans’ messages and data incidentally.

Intelligence agencies are required to take steps to protect U.S. information, including redacting the names of any Americans from reports unless they are deemed relevant to an investigation. The process of removing redactions is known as “unmasking.”

“CIA recognizes and takes very seriously our obligation to respect the privacy and civil liberties of U.S. persons in the conduct of our vital national security mission,” Kristi Scott, the agency’s privacy and civil liberties officer, said in a statement. “CIA is committed to transparency consistent with our obligation to protect intelligence sources and methods.”

The CIA released a series of redacted recommendations about the program issued by an oversight panel known as the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. According to the document, a pop-up box warns CIA analysts using the program that seeking any information about U.S. citizens or others covered by privacy laws requires a foreign intelligence purpose.

“However, analysts are not required to memorialize the justification for their queries,” the board said.

Both senators have long pushed for more transparency from the intelligence agencies. Nearly a decade ago, a question Wyden posed to the nation’s spy chief presaged critical revelations about the NSA’s mass-surveillance programs.

In 2013, Wyden asked then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper if the NSA collected “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.” Clapper initially responded, “No.” He later said, “Not wittingly.”

Former systems administrator Edward Snowden later that year revealed the NSA’s access to bulk data through U.S. internet companies and hundreds of millions of call records from telecommunications providers. Those revelations sparked worldwide controversy and new legislation in Congress.

Clapper would later apologize in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, calling his response to Wyden “clearly erroneous.”

According to Wyden and Heinrich’s letter, the CIA’s bulk collection program operates outside of laws passed and reformed by Congress, but under the authority of Executive Order 12333, the document that broadly governs intelligence community activity and was first signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981.

“It is critical that Congress not legislate without awareness of a ... CIA program, and that the American public not be misled into believe that the reforms in any reauthorization legislation fully cover the IC’s collection of their records,” the senators wrote in their letter. There was a redaction in the letter before “CIA program.”

Additional documents released by the CIA Thursday also revealed limited details about a program to collect financial data against the Islamic State. That program also has incidentally snared some records held by Americans.

Intelligence agencies are subject to guidelines on the handling and destruction of Americans’ data. Those guidelines and laws governing intelligence activity have evolved over time in response to previous revelations about domestic spying.

The FBI spied on the U.S. civil rights movement and secretly recorded the conversations of Dr. Martin Luther King. The CIA, in what was called Operation Chaos, investigated whether the movement opposing the Vietnam War had links to foreign countries.

“These reports raise serious questions about the kinds of information the CIA is vacuuming up in bulk and how the agency exploits that information to spy on Americans,” Patrick Toomey, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “The CIA conducts these sweeping surveillance activities without any court approval, and with few, if any, safeguards imposed by Congress.”

No shit.

 

[Silvanus]

You know, I made an error talking about gun control here, and I not only admitted to it, I conceded the point. You got your facts wrong on this multiple times, and admitted the error both times, but you just won't let the facts impact your overall position. The income tax systems are pretty darn close, at $15,000 you pay more here, but at $30,000 you pay more there. A billionaire in Alaska pays less than the UK, who pays less than a billionaire in California. Yet you still maintain there's a huge difference. That's not admitting the error in a meaningful sense.

Oh please. This is the Portland, Oregon thing? The only thing pushing that over the line is the city's additional tax, meaning income is taxed thrice. Even in the rest of Oregon that doesn't apply. You chose an uber-high tax exceptional instance for a reason.

Since our overall discussion was whether the uber-rich are taxed more in the UK or the US, you're damn right it doesn't change much that they pay more in one city in the US, when they pay significantly less in most of the rest of the country.

I didn't describe the situation as legal with exceptions based on statistics, that literally the law there. You can't get an abortion at all without 2 doctors agreeing to the exception. But while we are on the subject, did you know that a bill to lower the gestational limit (outside serious health issues) in the UK to 12 months has been proposed. That at one point, the number was 28, now it's 24, and a bill to get it down to 20 or 18, I forget precisely, was voted for by most of the Conservatives? Which, funny enough, would put you closer in line to Europe.

I got Saelune on board with this once, I know I can get you. People act like the US should be more like Europe, but they're basically talking about healthcare. When Republicans try and match Europe on corporate taxes or abortion restrictions, they suddenly forget to care about the rest of the world, and keep on calling the US super right wing.

The numbers show that "2 doctors" stipulation is not really restrictive. You forget, we don't have to shell out for their time, here.

The fact is that in most Republican states, the limits are more restrictive than they are here. That's factually the situation as it is. In Texas, the most populous Republican state, the limit is so restrictive as to render it near-illegal. And in countless counties, there are no providers at all, following endless Republican efforts to get then shut down.

This isn't even comparable, and nobody with faint knowledge of the situation here could think it was.

 

[Agema]

When Republicans try and match Europe on corporate taxes or abortion restrictions, they suddenly forget to care about the rest of the world, and keep on calling the US super right wing.

Well, sort of. But when you're trying to defend the USA by saying that places like Turkmenistan are worse, you're pretty much losing the argument before you start.

 

[Generals]

People act like the US should be more like Europe, but they're basically talking about healthcare. When Republicans try and match Europe on corporate taxes or abortion restrictions, they suddenly forget to care about the rest of the world, and keep on calling the US super right wing.

About corporate taxes; that's a poor argument as you're neglecting the bigger picture. I have already linked OECD data about the tax income/GDP ratio of OECD countries.
You have to look at the global picture, the US was already a country which taxed less than most European countries and decided to reduce its nominal rate for one type of tax where it was above many to further reduce the global tax burden.
And the effect of US policy can be seen in many indices where it scores poorly compared to european countries:

Income inequality

Income inequality is the difference in how income is distributed among the population.

data.oecd.org

Poverty rate

Poverty rate is the ratio of the population whose income falls below the poverty line.

data.oecd.org

As for abortion, Republicans don't want to emulate European restrictions, they are all out trying to restrict it as much as possible through various means. This while in most western European countries discussions are usually about reducing restrictions and almost never about increasing them.

 

[tstorm823]

Well, sort of. But when you're trying to defend the USA by saying that places like Turkmenistan are worse, you're pretty much losing the argument before you start.

No, I'm not comparing to Turkmenistan. Let's try Norway. 22% corporate income tax, voting requires photo I'd, abortions require applications after 12 weeks and are banned at 22 weeks. Do those sound like Democratic proposals or Republican proposals?

Oh please. This is the Portland, Oregon thing? The only thing pushing that over the line is the city's additional tax, meaning income is taxed thrice. Even in the rest of Oregon that doesn't apply. You chose an uber-high tax exceptional instance for a reason.

Excuse me? I chose that place at your specified $500,000, where city tax pushed it over. You chose specifically a number beneath the top tax bracket to make that happen. A large percent of the US population lives in states with higher max rates on the richest than the UK. New York, New Jersey, California... all places with higher max rate without anything like local income tax.

About corporate taxes; that's a poor argument as you're neglecting the bigger picture. I have already linked OECD data about the tax income/GDP ratio of OECD countries.

That's just not a meaningful usage of GDP for analysis. The proportion between GDP and tax rates has no meaning whatsoever.

As for abortion, Republicans don't want to emulate European restrictions, they are all out trying to restrict it as much as possible through various means. This while in most western European countries discussions are usually about reducing restrictions and almost never about increasing them.

What makes you think that? Viability moves downwards as technology advances, all the nations with viability laws talk about moving that line. What discussions are you seeing about reducing restrictions?

 

[Silvanus]

Excuse me? I chose that place at your specified $500,000, where city tax pushed it over.

Actually, I chose it just because its so utterly unreachable for ordinary people, so it means we're exclusively talking about the uber-wealthy.

You chose specifically a number beneath the top tax bracket to make that happen. A large percent of the US population lives in states with higher max rates on the richest than the UK. New York, New Jersey, California... all places with higher max rate without anything like local income tax.

New York and California and New Jersey... you mean three Democratic states?

Right, so... what do they say about Republican tax policy again?

When Republicans control tax, its usually drastically lower on the highest earners than the UK. That's the crux of the argument. You remembered we were talking about Republican policy here, right?

 

[Agema]

No, I'm not comparing to Turkmenistan. Let's try Norway. 22% corporate income tax, voting requires photo I'd, abortions require applications after 12 weeks and are banned at 22 weeks. Do those sound like Democratic proposals or Republican proposals?

Corporation tax rates are not the same as corporation tax liabilities. It's the liabilities that matter, because that's what companies actually pay. The USA had high headline rates, but it did not have high liabilities, because there are so many offsets and rebates available.

For instance, in the UK, corporation tax has a headline rate of 19%, and raises about £50 billion a year, which is ~2% GDP. France has a headline rate of 27%, raises ~E70 billion or just over 2%. The USA has a headline rate of 22% and raises about $230 billion, which is about 1% GDP. It was raising the same as the UK and France (~2% GDP) when its rates were 35%! This was the misleading wheeze that the Republicans pulled: claiming their corporation tax unfairly disadvantaged the USA compared to international equivalents to justify a cut, when in fact the system was already rigged to be equivalent. The huge cut to the headline rate accompanied by no significant closure of loopholes, rebates, etc. was nothing but a corporate windfall.

 

[Generals]

That's just not a meaningful usage of GDP for analysis. The proportion between GDP and tax rates has no meaning whatsoever.

It means a lot more than the nominal rate of one particular tax.
It shows how much resources the government is willing to tax in order to fund welfare programs. Your metric however, is entirely useless as it only takes into account one tax type and totally ignores all types of deductions companies can claim.

What makes you think that? Viability moves downwards as technology advances, all the nations with viability laws talk about moving that line. What discussions are you seeing about reducing restrictions?

I know in Belgium there were discussions about increasing the current deadline of 12 weeks, same goes for France. In the Netherlands they just removed a mandatory 5 days "thinking" period.

 

[Trunkage]

Well it's not going to be the perfectly upstanding citizens whose addiction hasn't cause their life to collapse who will need new crack pipes on the grounds of hygiene because they're sharing it round with so many others is it now?

You know what would be better? offering some program to help get them off it or some of the programs being trialled with replacement substances etc.

Dude. This is America. You are suggesting something incredibly unAmerican. To be fair, this idea is incredibly un-American

I would hope this idea would lead to something more substantial. But doing this would be a significant change in policy... for America.

You don't have to worry. The cancelling effort work. Biden caved

 

[Trunkage]

I got a question about Florida. (And the don't say gay bill.) I've been told on numerous occasions that Florida is a bit weird. Florida man etc, etc

I feel like LBGT should fit right in there. Have I just been sold a lie about Florida my whole life?

 

[tstorm823]

Actually, I chose it just because its so utterly unreachable for ordinary people, so it means we're exclusively talking about the uber-wealthy.

You mean exclusively talking about a fraction of the uber wealthy, because if you talk about the very richest or the middle class, your narrative flips.

When Republicans control tax, its usually drastically lower on the highest earners than the UK. That's the crux of the argument. You remembered we were talking about Republican policy here, right?

How many qualifiers are you going to add? A handful of Republican states have different funding structures than individual income taxes. Alaska has oil royalties, Florida has tourism, Nevada has gambling. Republicans work to minimize tax burden on their constituents yes.

But you do understand, I hope, not a lot of rich people live in red states. Because people live in cities, and big cities turn states blue.

Corporation tax rates are not the same as corporation tax liabilities. It's the liabilities that matter, because that's what companies actually pay. The USA had high headline rates, but it did not have high liabilities, because there are so many offsets and rebates available.

For instance, in the UK, corporation tax has a headline rate of 19%, and raises about £50 billion a year, which is ~2% GDP. France has a headline rate of 27%, raises ~E70 billion or just over 2%. The USA has a headline rate of 22% and raises about $230 billion, which is about 1% GDP. It was raising the same as the UK and France (~2% GDP) when its rates were 35%! This was the misleading wheeze that the Republicans pulled: claiming their corporation tax unfairly disadvantaged the USA compared to international equivalents to justify a cut, when in fact the system was already rigged to be equivalent. The huge cut to the headline rate accompanied by no significant closure of loopholes, rebates, etc. was nothing but a corporate windfall.

Two economists walk down the street. As they're walking, they come across a pile of dog shit. One economist says to the other, "If you eat that dog shit, I'll give you $50". The second economist thinks for a minute, then reaches down, picks up the shit, and eats it. The first economist gives him a $50 bill and they keep going on their walk. A few minutes later, they come across another pile of dog shit. This time, the second economist says to the first, "Hey, if you eat that, I'll give you $50." So, of course, the first economist picks up the shit, eats it, and gets $50. Walking a little while farther, the first economist looks at the second and says, "You know, I gave you $50 to eat dog shit, then you gave me back the same $50 to eat dog shit. I can't help but feel like we both just ate dog shit for nothing."

"That's not true", responded the second economist. "We increased the GDP by $100!"

Stop trying to make arguments based on GDP, it's not a meaningful argument.

I know in Belgium there were discussions about increasing the current deadline of 12 weeks, same goes for France.

Please, just consider the implications of this sentence? There were discussions, and they didn't change, which is to say there are people in favor of keeping the 12 week limit. The current Earth-shattering controversy in the US is one state attempting a 15-week limit. And that is your counterpoint to me saying Europe has stricter abortion laws.