If someone is lying -- as in, intentionally stating falsehoods -- then damn straight, they should be shut down and not allowed the luxury of an audience.

Fraud is fraud.

Fraud does not deserve an audience.

Fraud is not protected speech.

Admiral Holdo

I initially (mis-)read that as Admiral Hodor, and I had to pause as that bizarre mash-up played out in my head.

Seattle is dying.

If what I've seen over the past decade is the trajectory of a "dying" city, I can only hope to be so lucky as I age.

Great documentary by KOMO news. Look it up and watch it. You will understand what is really going on in the Emerald City.

KOMO is owned by Sinclair Broadcasting. I don't trust their angle. See also the Seattle Times article, "Turmoil inside KOMO News as conservative owner Sinclair mandates talking points".

Cheers,

I dunno, that sounds about right for the current political environment in the US. Ideology and Wishy Thinking FTW!

:-P

Cheers,

From the sound of it, are the Rotating Festering Assholes the DC-based successors to the Butthole Surfers ?

I'm very curious where you live that that's the case. I'm in Seattle, living within the city limits, and that's more than half again what I make in a year. I certainly wouldn't mind getting more income, but I'm not hurting. Informal polls of my acquaintances suggest that $60K-$80K is pretty average for skilled, non-developer corporate work.

What standard of living do you consider to be "lower-middle-class income"? And in what urban area?

Cheers,

That was a really good post, and I think it deserves to be brought up more often -- especially when the context fits, as in this case. :)

Who could have predicted...?

Perhaps the biologists studying hippo butt leeches ? Because "yes, there are simularities."

Cheers,

First off, wow, you're being an ass.

Second off, instead of bashing me as Some Guy On The Internets, put on your critical thinking cap, read the source text, and educate yourself.

I'll even make it easy for you and copy out the relevant section from page 26 (bolding mine):

Article VII Section 1 SECTION 1 TAXATION. The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word "property" as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership.

So for Washington state law, as relates to the state Constitution, "property" would include income.

If your beef is with the word "levy" instead, again, read the source text. You'll find that the word "levy" is used in the more general sense of "to impose or collect by legal authority; the imposition or collection of an assessment". See the Merriam-Webster entry if you'd like.

Search the text of the Constitution itself, and you'll find collocations like the one in the blockquote above, where "taxes" are "levied". Notably, this is not the same thing as a federal IRS levy, which is what you seem to be thinking about. It's important to recognize that different branches and levels of government sometimes use the same terms in different ways.

Cheers,

Yes, I saw that too, in >Article VII Section 1 Taxation, on page 26. However, after searching through the entire document for "property" and "class", the state Constitution does not itself define classes of property, aside from noting in that same section:

All real estate shall constitute one class...

... with further explanation that the Legislature may define other property as exempt from taxation.

So while taxation must indeed be uniform as levied upon a single class of property, I see nothing preventing the Legislature from defining other classes, and then setting different tax rates upon the different classes.

The relevant sections are on pages 26 and 27 of the Constitution's text, available online here:

http://leg.wa.gov/lawsandagencyrules/documents/12-2010-wastateconstitution.pdf

Specifically (italics mine):

Article VII Section 2 SECTION 2 LIMITATION ON LEVIES. Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one percent of the true and fair value of such property in money. Nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only as follows:...

There follows three long passages describing the conditions under which such a "taxing district" may exceed the 1% aggregate taxation limit defined previously on page 26. Whether Seattle's particular circumstances meet those conditions, I have no particular comment. I post this merely to point out that Seattle, as a city government, does have a constitutionally viable mechanism for imposing its own tax scheme.

Cheers,

Deja poo?

Agreed the verboseness argument is bogus, otherwise the whole debate would consist of COBOL people on one side, and APL people on the other. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum of verboseness, and both languages largely suck, but for different reasons.

Semi-serious question:

What happens if you use the --verbose command-line option with an APL program?

Granted, the option affects the output at runtime, while APL is the language the program is coded in -- I'm not that confused. But it got me to wondering. :)