Isn't converting legitimately owned content from one medium to another covered under fair use?

Ban "Assault Lathes"!

There's a difference between actually generating revenue in a place (say, selling copies of Office) and using your "shuffling" and "loopholes" to make revenue end up somewhere else on paper. Whatever your preconceptions, it's clear that the US tax policy is different than nearly every other country. When $ can't be brought into the US without penalty, less will be spent/invested here.

There is another bunch of idiots who think in terms of " 'not confiscating more lawfully earned/obtained money from people' is synonymous with 'putting more money into [their] hands' "

Only the US charges income tax on profits from foreign subsidiaries which have already been taxed abroad. Besides being unfair, such a disincentive to bring the money into the US obviously discourages the spending and employing here that could be done with it.

I think this over-the-top PC trend is mostly shallow self-crongratulatory (or self-flagellating) mental masturbation - and the groups engaging in it are in their own feedback loop, in frenzied agreement with each other. It's like blaming domestic volence on old silent movies where the good guy saves the woman ties to the railroad tracks.

BUT

Threats and intimidation are wholly unacceptable responses to pretty much *any* idea or (non-violent) opinion or position. Such a response to something that might seem shallow and silly is not only unacceptable, but has the unintended consequence of giving credibility to the silliness.

Why not just give them multiple SIM cards?

RTFA - there's no association with the Koch boogeymen other than that the president of the "astroturf group" used to work for a group which did have Koch ties.

The author of the article expressly states that he doesn't know who funds the group. Its title is inaccurate and irresponsible.

Perfect: Adam Smith supports a flat tax ("The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state"). Do you?

I'm more against government having unaccountable powers (which this is a good example of) than I am ultra-pro-capitalism.

bought-and-paid-for politicians using the law to favor their friends isn't "the free market"

My Audi does this. Why isn't the VW Group on the defendants list?

Still works for me

You had me at "tits and swords". Actually, you had me at "tits".

Coercive laws forbidding direct sale to consumers and requiring they be sokd through dealerships is the *opposite* of capitalism.

No, I'm suggesting one should adhere to the same standard he asks of someone with whom he disagrees. And your claim was made precisely in support of the argument that gun ownership has been declining.

Which, BTW, is incorrect. Not only is ownership not declining, but new purchases are increasing. So gun ownership is not only increasing but accelerating.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...