Even if I go back to the 1990s and boxed retail software, you were never actually buying the software, your purchase was for the license to use it.
What law made software publishers able to enforce their bullshit licenses? Contract law does not as it requires a "meeting of the minds".
To my knowledge, software is owned unless specifically set up as a rental/subscription such as Adobe Creative Cloud.
I do not trust the companies doing the programming.
The company with arguably the best software engineers on the planet are completely incapable of writing a reliable operating system and you expect a company with theoretically less-capable engineers to write software maneuvering a multi-ton vehicle at high speeds around other humans?
Yeah, no. (the results so far are impressive in many ways, but still; yeah, no.)
You could have just asked them to perform a password reset rather than fighting a battle with the CEO. *shrug*
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?
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.
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?
Sounds like the cop just whipped out his personal device and snapped a pic. How does that pass muster with collection of evidence, Chain of Custody... you know, that stuff that serves to prove the evidence wasn't tampered with in some way on the way to the D.A.?
Who cares? A guy was arrested for a crime that was committed. As long as someone was arrested, nobody seems to care.
Humans will always gravitate to the laziest available route so unless the followup is forcibly built in you have not added any judgement or evaluation or review. You have a reverse centaur.
Why did you post this as an Anonymous Coward? This is incredibly insightful. I am guessing it is because you actually are a coward
* * * * * THIS TERMINAL IS IN USE * * * * *
