Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I can see the intended point of the NR post that DG refers to. The reflexive tendency to call acts of violence "senseless" is a modern habit that tends to discourage one from drawing links between such violence and previous, clearly stated intentions that—if taken seriously—just might have lessened or averted some of the violence. And going by the date it was written, I'd say the NR contributor was obviously accusing Obama of a cause/effect myopia that (at byline) was repeating itself in a willful failure to connect the dots between the rhetoric of the new Egyptian & Libyan ruling parties, and the likelihood of future violence in the region. Now, reasonable people can disagree on whether that's so, but it certainly doesn't amount to a quibble over Nazism, or a defense of it.
There's a way to make your point, and then there's a way to make your point that draws associations in your reader's mind so as to bias them against a position or person (usually but not always by bringing in irrelevant information). The article is a clear case of the latter, except transparently, laughably so.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Didn't the NR back the Iraq invasion? I suspect "valuable insights on the tendency to ignore the motives behind violence" might not be a product they want to sell.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.I backed it, though not for the Administration's and alliance's reasons, and would still back it if the aftermath could retroactively be handled more intelligently. And RT: I maintain that the article is pretty much par for any opinionated journal dedicated to either end of the political spectrum. Not every WWII allusion is a covert Godwin; if Mother Jones makes some similar point, mutatis mutandis, based on some future Republican president's statement, I sincerely hope I can refrain from being silly about it. Should I fail, you have my permission to jump on me with both feet.
![]()
Not sure if serious.
For one thing, the newspaper is clearly fake, it has nothing but a picture and a title, beside no newspaper I know is called "Daily Truth".
The black guy is photoshopped on top of the "White House" thing, even his beard looks weird.
Newscast like that get photoshopped all the time, it's not hard, so I hardly trust that considering the top half.
Dude holding the newspaper looks like Dave Chappelle.
![]()
It's less covert Godwin and more blatant grasping for straws with hints of dog-whistle baiting. They're not blowing the whistle very hard, admittedly, but it comes across as passive-aggressive, especially with the jumping over Benghazi (again)
Something on the sales tax vs. income tax:
Sales tax hurts small businesses more. It eats into profit margins and makes consumers spend less. It also leads to a lot more double taxation, especially in small businesses.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickWell, first a business needs to pay for a product. Smaller businesses are more likely to have to pay sales tax on this product as they can't dodge it using loopholes the same way a big one can. This means they have to either make their product more expensive or get less profit on each unit.
Consumers only have so much money to spend. A high sales tax eats into that making them spend less. That high sales tax makes final bills seem far more expensive which can cause sticker shock and make them want things far less.
This also hurts the small business more because it's profit margins are smaller than a large business so anything that hurts consumer spending hurts them far more than Walmart.
Having less money to start with does not have the same psychological effect. Good deals still seem like good deals and cheap is cheap. Besides, sales taxes are regressive and hurt the poor far more than the rich taking a far larger chunk of their income away.
It helps small business more to repeal sales tax and raise income tax. This tends to stimulate consumer spending and has worked very well on small businesses in the states that have it.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickThe double taxation is simply because you are begin taxed once when you earn the money, then once again when you trade the money for goods. As for it eating into profit margins, it's probably because a lot of people will budget their shopping to a certain amount. So say a shopper spends $100 on groceries plus $25 of sales tax (their shopping budget being $125) If the sales tax wasn't there they would instead spend $125 on groceries, earning the shop an extra $25.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@Maxima: in summation of what they said. small businesses have to usually pay sales tax on shit they buy too. which means higher prices for you. which means you're less likely to buy fr0om the small business.
In short, this is pretty much blatantly attempting to disguise killing small businesses as "pro-business legislation"
Hey we don't have sales tax in my country, not paying attention in school is no excuse. I'm pretty sure we also let businesses of VAT (the closest equivalent we have to sales tax).

![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
Yeah, switching from income tax to sales tax is like pulling a reverse Robin Hood.
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."