Uh, no, you are missing the GP's point. (1) Their assets are not necessarily liquid. (2) Their assets can fluctuate wildly in value, that includes sharp declines.
Are they REALLY missing the point? Or are YOU missing the point?
Those unrealized gains are good enough to borrow from, so they are good enough to tax. The simplest method is to tax the money as it is being loaned. Everyone agrees on the value then.
Billionaire trickle-down-fuck-YOU-pay-for-it-pleb economics will ensure retired homeowners on a fixed income end up losing their homes, because tax the shit out of those 'urealized gains' called home equity..
So what? There are millions of people within the USA that have never, and will never, own a fucking home. Let it all burn until we can learn to organize a society where people who are willing to work are treated fairly. What exists now is essentially slavery but without all the responsibilities of maintaining the slaves. Fuck that noise. That is no way to live. If you think what I am saying is unreasonable, that is only because of the social status of your parents.
You borrow against your portfolio to live, generating no income.
If the value is certain enough to borrow from, it is certain enough to tax. Lies and deception should no longer be tolerated.
I like paying taxes as long as those taxes are being put back into my community instead of into some rat bastard trillionaires pocket.
That is not the way it works. You pay taxes, the government (doesn't matter which level) assigns a contract to a buddy's company, kickbacks happen to the politicians who greenlighted it, and something hopefully gets done with the remaining value of your taxes.
If it goes through and eventually becomes law, who really believes this will be a ONE-TIME ever tax on the UNREALIZED wealth of individuals?
Well, if they can borrow against that unrealized wealth, they can be taxed on that unrealized wealth. Fair is fair.
Harris could have maintained the facade, this is true; however, the facade was covering extreme corruption, so it is better that the facade was not maintained. Or are you thinking Trump is a cause rather than a symptom?
When it's codified into the highest law of the land and doesn't work, and suggestions to do so voluntarily can't work to the point of being laughable, what options do we have left?
There's always Nancy Reagan's catchphrase: Just Say No.
Any particular game is expendable. You won't miss out on anything. Games don't even have the network effects and lockin that you get with other types of software; it's a part of the economy where Just Saying No is easiest of all.
Don't like the quality? Don't spend your money. They have no power over us except what we give them. Stop being so selflessly altruistic when it comes to actively supporting your own abuse.
It's so damn easy, and there's already hundreds of years worth of hassle-free game-playing available to spend the few remaining seconds of your life on.
Can we use these glasses, or are they just as worthless as Google's and Meta's, where they choose everything for you, and you'll likely get a DMCA complaint if you try to use them for your own purposes?
If not, then $21.95 is about as much as these people should be charging for the product, which is obviously intended to get its revenue through proprietary software/services sales.
In the 1980s, a single parent on typical wage could afford a decent house, nice car, and to raise a family of spouse and 2-3 children.
No, they couldn't. Ask me how I know. Sure, it was "easier" then, but not THAT easy; especially the house.
Because it has elevated the other 99% out of the depths of horrific poverty better than any other system out there.
Sure, but for the past 50 years, the poor have been getting poorer, not being lifted up by the 'rising tide'. Corporations have been consolidating and now there is almost no genuine competition and the prices have increased in lockstep.
In other words, this is demonstrably no longer Capitalism.
One of the problems America currently faces, is that we're still getting far too much science done, it's not costing us enough money, and the money it does cost is being wasted on paying the salaries of scientists instead of personally paying whoever contracts to kick back the most to political appointees.
I believe this will help solve all three problems.
Every single day, it seems like the White House does something to keep the ongoing Epstein Obstruction Scandal in the news. It's been the top story for months and every single day there's new news about it.
On Thursday, Todd Blanche, presumably acting under orders, spent all day obstructing the release of the information. And then he did the same thing on Friday. And now there's this UFO story, looking almost custom-made as a silly distraction. Blanche or Trump clearly wants to keep the illegal obstruction on voters' minds, as an evergreen topic so that it never goes away. But why?
What does Trump get by working so hard to persuade every American that he disagrees with a law that he signed, implying that laws is a bad idea and shouldn't be applied or enforced? What advantages are gained by an explicitly pro-crime agenda? What's the advantage of campaigning on releasing the files but then breaking my campaign promise?
I (naively?) think if I were in his position, I would comply with the law so that I don't go to prison for obstruction, and so people wouldn't notice every day that I'm still casually and continuously committing crime. I would let, no make the files come out, so that everyone can see the criminal witnesses confused me with the actual rapist, Biden. That would put me in a position where I'm seen as pro-law instead of anti-law, and it would also put to rest all the speculation that the "Epstein" files are actually mostly about me. Seems like that would be good for everyone, including myself.
So why commit obstruction when the releasing files will exonerate you and make all the problems go away? This strategy doesn't make any sense. What could I possibly be missing?
I feel like there's something incredibly obvious that everyone with a more-than-50 IQ has figured out about the president's lily-white innocence, but somehow I'm just too fucking stupid to figure it out. It's humbling, and makes me question my deeply-held faith in the president's genius.
Then We The People need (or have needed) to become post-newspaper, indeed post-any-sort-of-centralized-media, since all centralizations are pressure points for coercion and compromise.
Make Usenet Great Again? There is No Cab-NO CARRIER
Throughout most of history, females that are fertile have been experiencing pregnancy as soon as they are able. If that wasn't the case, we would not be here as deaths from everything other than old age has been incredibly common.
Now that deaths from old age appear to outnumber all other deaths, there is no need for females to become pregnant as soon as they are able. That is why we enacted laws protecting young females. We do not need their participation anymore.
To me, it is gross and barbaric to treat females this way. They are people and not merely baby factories; however, it is not merely propaganda to discuss a historical fact and think that it is relevant to what is occurring now. It absolutely is a factor, even if not the primary reason.
Would they bet on one horse in a race featuring 100 horses if the odds were all roughly the same?
Remember, they are betting with YOUR money and they are rated on the amount of bets they place. What do YOU think the outcome will be?
It's not an optical illusion, it just looks like one. -- Phil White
