I still would be more impressed if the other discussions actually returned to their original topics. I certainly am not holding my breath for that to happen, though.
If "new capitlalism" doesn't need facts to support its claims, then how is it different from old capitalism? Seems like the same old scheme sold by a different salesman.
Other than the part where one goes to work, sure.
I encourage you to go back and read the comment you just replied to - which I helpfully quoted in full so you don't have to click back to see it for the first time - and then try replying to it after reading it. Your line made no sense as a response to what I wrote. Did you think you were replying to someone else's comment - perhaps even one that you actually read - when you hit reply and barfed up that statement?
While we're at it, I'll quote my original line (which you also have not approached in any meaningful way):
I would love to know how the author reaches the conclusion that "millions" are following that specific plan. How does one manage to gather that kind of data on millions of people?
or do you just want to keep talking about (your thoughts about) me?
We can continue exploring your resemblance to a wretched crapflooder, if you like. Or not.
Is it even possible to bring the discussion back to the matter of the JE itself, or are you determined to not return to the topic? I've certainly seen you go to great lengths to avoid discussing topics that expose the lack of depth of your knowledge on a topic, but that won't stop me from trying to have a discussion with you.
You keep saying that you believe you can't get what you want by using the legal system - both with the POTUS as well as with Hillary - so you have nothing left but to advocate for more extralegal action.
This logical leap is wholly, 100%, and entirely owned by you, and of your own devising.
You can only reach that conclusion if you ignore the avalanche of comments and JEs that you have written that explicitly show that being your ambition. You have not been one to let logic or reality get in your way as of late, though...
You very plainly have been calling for discarding the legal system when it doesn't suit your aims.
Is it the case that, when all of your other flaccid arguments fail, as they must, you have no recourse other than lying?
Are you pretending now that you have not been calling for the extralegal removal of the POTUS for years now? Are you pretending that you are not trying to mount some sort of campaign against Hillary that would make an end-run around the legal system in hopes of getting her out of the way? You can try to sell those, but nobody's buying them.
If you're not trying to pull off a full end-run around the law - as you have been trying against the POTUS for years now - then what is your goal?
What the balls are you even talking about, dude?
Read your own words. You keep saying that you believe you can't get what you want by using the legal system - both with the POTUS as well as with Hillary - so you have nothing left but to advocate for more extralegal action. You have advocated openly for the extralegal removal of the POTUS; now you are rallying the troops against Hillary with what action as a goal?
then accuse the straight folk of "trying to pull off a full end-run around the law"
The "straight folk"? Really, what on earth is that supposed to mean? You very plainly have been calling for discarding the legal system when it doesn't suit your aims.
The best growth - in terms of people and income - of the middle class that our country ever saw was when the taxes were progressive. There is simply no way around those simple facts.
I'm ready to scuttle the Lovecraftian monstrosity that is the tax code and go with something simple.
It is notable that what you said did not counter my point in any way, shape, or form. You highlighted it with your new subject line but did not respond to it.
"Simple" tends to disperse power, though.
A simple - if by simple you mean something like a flat tax - would vastly increase the annual tax liability of the wealthy and of industry. They would never stand for that, and they own too much of the government for it to ever gain traction. Some of the guys from your team will try to sell the idea but they know it will never go anywhere. They just give it lip service because it makes for good sound bites.
What makes you think I hate the godless Commie sodomite infestation that is the NYT?
Well, as much as you are proud of your ignorance, you show a special level of anger towards the Tims.
economically oppressive state that you treasure so much
Well, you've correctly diagnosed the problem, if not the source.
Regressive taxation has never solved the problem at any earlier attempt, and never will in any future attempt either. The best growth - in terms of people and income - of the middle class that our country ever saw was when the taxes were progressive. There is simply no way around those simple facts.
If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.