Comment Better yet (Score 1) 9
Define crypto as share trading, and tax it accordingly.
Define crypto as share trading, and tax it accordingly.
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 $21.95 is about as much as these people should be charging for the product, which is obviously intended to get its revenue through proprietary software/services sales.
There is no way the whole payment is taxable. Only certain *profits* are taxed, not all cash flow, and corporations have accountants who make sure any such profits are minimal.
They'd run it again today anyway.
you miss out on the true meaning of Christmas.
News would be if he did something that *wasn't* fraudulent.
Maybe Roku has been paying to carry Fox content, or Fox has been paying Roku to carry content (I don't know how their deals work), and now that doesn't have to happen anymore?
Let's do the math:
($Fox + $Payment) + ($Roku - $Payment) = $Fox + $Roku
That's a zero-sum transaction. No $400M savings there.
At least he ended another war on his birthday. People will be lining up to give him peace prizes.
Has an agreement actually been reached? Both sides agree on the terms?
How much was given away to get it?
How will Trump and his stooges spin it?
How long will it last?
I hope you'll forgive me for being skeptical, give what has happened up 'til now.
My last 99 investments were flops
Odd that they keep saying "we will release" and never do.
I thought we were talking about aliens.
Most referenced is Star Trek from the 1960s. how much of that is real now in some form or another?
Not aliens with lumps of rubber glued to their heads.
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.
Making a better battery, or commercializing it, is a milestone. Putting a research battery into an airplane is not a milestone. It's a publicity stunt.
Building a reliable long-range monoplane in 1927 was a milestone. Flying it solo from New York to Paris was a publicity stunt.
Which of these two actions do people remember and celebrate today?
Support bacteria -- it's the only culture some people have!