I don't think that this is "America", per se. This is more like "A small group of Americans", that small group consisting of Musk, his partners in crime, and his employees, with a few fanbois (like myself) thrown in for good measure. "America" is more concerned with petty nonsense, like appeasing the Muslims, gay marriage, and so-called "reality shows". And, that little freak who escaped protective custody in Canada - what's his name? Beiber?
"And not a fictional character."
Wait - huh - WUT?! Are you implying that Robert wrote FICTION!?!?! I'm not believing it for one second!
Or to put it another way, if someone feels the need to say "XYZ is settled science" that's a clue that it might not be.
And yet, she did her job wonderfully. She sold News-magazines.
Quadrouple Bluff, he randomly picked a name out the phone book, which happened to be his own name
American Journalism sucks because rather than being unbiased, they have an agenda to promote. This is why nation wide targeting of certain groups by the IRS, or NSA spying on Americans is less important than a lane closure on a NJ bridge.
And why is Lois Learner talking to DOJ investigators (not taking the 5th) while taking the 5th in front of congress.
This is basically the same thing that we saw the other day, when the judge said that Upskirt videos were not against the law. The problem is, there is no shame left in the world, because that is harmful to little sensitive minds.
> These types of projects aren't likely to get publicly funded because too much of tax revenue is now required to be spent on entitlements
That depends on how you use the term "entitlement." If you are referring to social security and medicare, you're off base because people literally are entitled to those programs after having been forced to pay into them.
If you're talking welfare in its various forms (for the people who are just lazy, not those who legitimately need it), pork projects, warmongering (welfare for Haliburton, etc.) then you're right - if we slash that wasteful spending then we could easily afford to explore the solar system and maybe even investigate "warp" technologies which have been legitimately theorized to be possible but impractical given current tech. Or, we could be spending the savings on green energy or fusion, since there is no legitimate reason energy should not be free for everybody on the planet by now.
Only if your neighborhood is inside a star.
(added to adjectives) on the inside; within.
No - right of first sale.
Sell your soul to the devil. Seems to work for the people that try it.
So, you admit that taxes discourage things. So, by your own admission, taxing Income discourages earning income. And you favor that over people / corporations in foreign lands? why?
My proposal has no effect on anything other than money leaving a country in foreign trade, and that is a good thing, as it encourages investment at home vs abroad, jobs and industry at home vs abroad.
I've said, and will continue to say that we should not be imposing Taxes on things that we should be encouraging, like income. We should be taxing the things we want to curtail. Taxing income is downright EVIL, as it is a disincentive to actually working, which is only overcome by most people's need to better their lives.
How about instead of taxing income, you tax money being transferred out of state/country?
Of course you're right. This is one of the reasons I drum the "all taxes are regressive". The rich can and will avoid as much tax liability, often quite legally (like this), while the poor and middle class cannot, because they do not have the resources. If you could spend 100 to save 1000 in taxes, wouldn't you?
There is a fix for this, a transfer tax, rather than an income tax. Tax money leaving your country. The easiest avoidance of these taxes is to keep the money in country, helping the country's economy. If money NEEDS to leave, then it provides an incentive to bring jobs home and use the resources of your own country.