KevonLooney

joined 1 year ago
[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

This is legitimately the dumbest argument. You will just dismiss any commenters who disagree with you ("that's your opinion, donate it to the government!").

Besides, there are literal billionaires who will actually be affected by this clamoring for it. No one who has less than $100 million will be affected. No I don't need a history lesson about income tax. If you want to live in a country without taxes, Somalia will welcome you.

P.S.: I have more than $20K in personal investments.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol. You are ignoring the fact that we already tax unrealized gains: property tax. And that's actually harder to value than something on a stock market.

An "unknown number"? When you open your Robinhood app, does it show numbers? Because if it doesn't I think you need to message their help desk.

The only proposals are for massive gains above $100 million. I think a 1% tax on that would be just fine.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 3 points 3 weeks ago

When you close a business on paper you don’t suddenly lose access to services in the name of that business.

Yes you do. Your bank account is in the old business's name, and any lines of credit you have will be in that business's name as well. Doing anything for a new business is harder than for an established one. Once you explain "oh yeah I did own that one, I just changed the name for tax purposes" you sound like a scammer.

Banks and suppliers (good ones) are not going to waste their time figuring out your scheme. They will just drop you.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 10 points 3 weeks ago

I mean, I would assume that someone who doesn't get a new enough car doesn't have enough money to pay for commercial insurance. Also offering people rides on the street is a bad idea (because you can get robbed) and possibly illegal. This is just running an unlicensed taxi service. Gypsy cabs have been around for hundreds of years. It's not a good idea.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 24 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

That's a terrible idea. His insurance won't cover him in an accident. If a passenger is injured he may be on the hook for the medical care.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

That's not how insurance works. They monitor average speed, acceleration, and braking, if anything. There's no correlation between mouth movement and accidents. What if someone is chewing gum? What about adjusting dentures? What about drinking coffee while parked?

Show me an actuarial table that includes "mouth movement" as a variable or admit this is just a middle manager trying something stupid.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No, you will not "have to do it". Either they can afford to pay a qualified person to do it, or they can't. If they can't afford a more expensive person, they definitely can't afford to fire you. You are the cheap one.

Think about it: if they put themselves in this situation, they are going to end up cleaning it themselves. "Need money for rent and food"? If you have a crappy minimum wage job, you have the power. Literally no one above you wants to do your work. You can definitely tell them "no". Do you think there's some shortage of crappy minimum wage jobs?

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Reminder to anyone still working retail: if your job description isn't "janitor", you don't need to clean that up. It's a biohazard and they can pay more expensive people with better equipment to do it.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

JFK is not considered one of the best. He didn't even have a full term, so there's no way to know. People liked him because he was young and handsome and died that way.

He started the Vietnam War. His only real test was the Cuban Missile Crisis. He did adopt Keynesianism economic policies (over more classical policies) and proposed the bill that became the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Those are all important, but he honestly wasn't in office long enough to do much.

And besides, like you said he was 43, not 35. AOC would not be able to do anything because she doesn't have the relationships yet. Good presidents don't come from the House of Representatives. They come from the Senate (JFK, Obama), Governors (FDR), or Vice Presidents (Harris).

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 33 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Good. You probably don't want a hatchet to be that sharp. You're not going to be doing anything delicate with it. Sharp blades have the edge bend or break easily.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 44 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Uh, Android is the alternative to Apple's iOS. Android is much more customizable.

 

Background on the disaster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Chicago_disaster

The black enlisted workers were specifically selected to be the dumbest and least competent:

None of the new recruits had been instructed in ammunition loading.

At NSGL, the enlisted African Americans who tested in the top 30% to 40% were selected for non-labor assignments. Port Chicago was manned by workers drawn from those remaining. The Navy determined that the quality of African American petty officers at Port Chicago suffered because of the absence of high-scoring black men

The Navy's General Classification Test (GCT) results for the enlisted men at Port Chicago averaged 31, putting them in the lowest twelfth of the Navy.

The white officers in charge had no training with munitions, and refused to train the men:

Prior to his being sent to command Port Chicago, Kinne had no training in the loading of munitions and little experience in handling them.[12] Loading officers serving underneath Kinne had not been trained in handling munitions until they had been posted to Mare Island Navy Yard, after which they were considered adequate to the task by the Navy.

Later the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) responded to word of unsafe practices by offering to bring in experienced men to train the battalion; the Navy leadership declined the offer,[16] fearing higher costs, slower pace, and possible sabotage from civilian longshoremen.[17] No enlisted man stationed at Port Chicago had received formal training in the handling and loading of explosives into ships.

Finally, a civilian plumber working right before the explosion described the poor conditions:

While at work he witnessed a man accidentally drop a naval artillery shell two feet onto the wooden pier, but there was no detonation. Carr waited until the African-American winch operator tested the repaired winch and then left the pier, thinking that the operation appeared unsafe.

The explosion:

At 10:18 p.m., witnesses reported hearing a noise described as "a metallic sound and rending timbers, such as made by a falling boom."[26] Immediately afterward, an explosion occurred on the pier and a fire started. Five to seven seconds later[16][30][31] a more powerful explosion took place as the majority of the ordnance within and near the SS E. A. Bryan detonated in a fireball seen for miles. An Army Air Forces pilot flying in the area reported that the fireball was 3 mi (4.8 km) in diameter.

 

I had an idea that would allow people to buy their own homes that they are currently renting:

  1. Every home gets appraised to determine what it would sell for. This is done by the county and is used for property taxes too.
  2. Every renter is allowed to buy a percentage of their primary residence from the owner. The owner has no choice in this. It's a requirement for being able to rent a property. Edit: Since people are confused about this, the renter is not required to buy anything. They have an option to buy.
  3. Renters can pay as little as $100 extra per month and the county puts their percentage ownership on the deed. If the home is sold, the renter can't be kicked out involuntarily. If they do leave, they get the percentage of home value they own.

Pros:

  • This would avoid the issue of high interest rates hurting primary homeownership.
  • This would blunt the impact of corporate landlords having a monopoly where they refuse to sell. They are forced to sell at a fair price.
  • This would create a simple decision between owning their home and spending money on luxuries or eating out.

Cons:

  • This would hurt small landlords who would have their property bought out from under them. This is actually a good thing because the benefits of rising property values are now shared.
  • The implementation is hard. This is actually a good thing because bad landlords would sell property they didn't want to manage, lowering prices for renters who want to buy.
  • It would cost the county money to hire appraisers. But this could be paid for by increased property taxes due to better appraisals.
  • Property taxes would go up for landlords. But this would be good, as it encourages them to sell the property. This appraisal process and increased property taxes wouldn't affect people who just lived in their home without charging rent.
 

“As trains — many carrying hazardous material — have grown longer, crews should not be getting smaller,” said Eddie Hall, the president of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen union. He praised the FRA for taking the step President Joe Biden promised. Hall said keeping two people in the cab of a locomotive is crucial now that railroads rely on longer trains that routinely stretch for miles.

 

Things that make us go.

view more: next ›