what you ignore while you talk about capitol gains is they already paid taxes on that income. why should they pay again??? let alone at a higher rate???
That is absolutely false. From the definition of capital gains:
When you sell a capital asset, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount you sell it for is a capital gain or a capital loss. Generally, an asset's basis is its cost to the owner, but if you received the asset as a gift or inheritance, refer to Topic 703 for information about your basis. You have a capital gain if you sell the asset for more than your basis. You have a capital loss if you sell the asset for less than your basis. Losses from the sale of personal-use property, such as your home or car, are not deductible.
You are not re-taxed on your original earnings (the "basis"). You are taxed on the growth in value or gain (hence the name).
so again. if these two phds in gender studies doing a study on gender bias received criticism about potential gender biases... Why is it wrong to address that?
Because the reviewer only talked about the potential, and did not find any actual gender bias in the article. I would be willing to bet that the article contains several examples and red flags of gender bias. If the reviewer had FOUND and could name "ideologically biased assumptions" or gender bias in the writing, then the reviewer would have a legitimate criticism of the article. If the reviewer had a counter-example to refute the article, then there would be a legitimate criticism. If the authors omitted information, then there would be a legitimate criticism.
Bottom line, the reviewer criticized the authors, not the article. And the editor should have been smart enough to see it and call BS.
Precisely. If I had ink covering my wrist, I would definitely read the watch's promotional material to see what technology is being used in that sensor. And once I determined it was optical, I sure as hell wouldn't buy one without a test-drive. The same for any off-nominal physical condition--it's the responsibility of the individual to see if the equipment functions in the presence of their physical variation. If you were one of the people whose dental work causes them to hear radio signals, would you buy a Bluetooth headset without trying it?
What I *do* have is quite hairy arms, I'm concerned enough about the pulse sensor working that I'm not even thinking about one of these watches until they're common enough to try on without an appointment (that, and since it's Apple, version 2.0 will be 25% cheaper and have 25% more features).
I think you are missing the point. When the pullout tabs were phased out in favor of tabs that stay with the can, I remember thinking that a thousand years from now discarded pullout tabs will be a valuable archeological resource. They are distinctive, ubiquitous, and indestructible, and because they were only used during a short time, they would conclusively date any architectural layer they were found in.
Exactly. I'm a contractor at the NASA Johnson Space Center. One day in the 90's, I was walking across a parking lot that had just been graded flat in preparation for a new layer of asphalt. I found myself in a "field" of dozens of pull-tabs embedded in the pavement. It was easy and fun to imagine some Apollo-era astronaut gathering. The Right Stuff, indeed.
(of course, today, just bringing alcohol inside the gate will get you fired)
But since this is Japan, the author speculates that the antipodal point is somewhere in Uruguay, which it is not (it's kinda close though).
Ironically, "Uruguay syndrome" is a more accurate term because Uruguay is a heck of a lot closer to being an antipode of Japan than China is to being an antipode of the US.
Well, sure, but there's *no* land antipodal to anywhere in the US. Gotta call it something. Indian Ocean syndrome?