Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.
I cannot believe that one-sided, war-mongering, short-sighted propaganda piece is called 'News'.
I used to work for a guy who founded a software company in Sunnyvale. After Bush got reelected, he decided to sell the company to Agilent for a couple million bucks, went back to Australia, and formed a new company there. He comes back to visit sometimes, and says that he now gets a lot of questions from people in Australia- "What happened over there? Americans used to be smart!" His standard answer: "No, it's not that they're stupid, but the news they get in the U.S. is really bad."
Not having to file or pay taxes on a large sum of money is likely good cause
Ooops, this is where I stopped reading.
He is working hard to earn that money if he is thinking about leaving it as a legacy for his children to enjoy that should be his choice. What difference does it matter if its $5 or $5 million, or hell $5 billion.
You sound bitter from losing. We you involved in the last election?
Yeah, I voted with the majority (of the popular vote)- guilty as charged.
I don't really care if two brothers pooled together or not. It is their choice not mine or yours and definitely not the US government's.
It's "not the US government's anymore, only because some people now are so rich they can afford to legalize their activities. (The Mafia, OTOH, was never really good at infiltrating politics.)
It simply said that some forms of speech costs money and that people can pool together in order to afford that costs.
Yes, two brothers were free at last to "pool together" donating 0.05% of their wealth through shady corporations to politicians who thump people with Bibles and propose policies from bad science fiction novels. And it's a good thing, too- this was the most expensive American election in history and now we need the help of billionaires if we want to win!
So they are going after the First Amendment.
You need to listen to someone other than Ted Cruz.
The Supreme Court ripped the First Amendment a new asshole in 2012 with their new concept that every dollar suddenly has free speech. "Going after the First Amendment" is a bullshit talking point made by people who directly benefit from corporate donations.
"While voters do express high levels of disgust about the state of campaign finance and the level of corruption in Washington, they tend to actually cast votes more on bread-and-butter economic issues."
But voters are easily convinced that if their freedom to form a corporate monopoly is central to their own economic future. I know a guy who drives a school bus and is worried sick about the estate tax.
The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.