epigallocatechin.bsky.social
@epigallocatechin.bsky.social
So navy and orange sped up and just managed to get in front of purple and lime? And the last car in the pack was behaving poorly because they were trying to help purple lime? And purple lime loses and loses his shit?
July 14, 2025 at 8:50 PM
So navy and orange sped up and just managed to get in front of purple and lime? And the last car in the pack was behaving poorly because they were trying to help purple lime? And purple lime loses and loses his shit?
Either
A. Tax the rich and your burden goes down
Or
B. Tax the rich, they leave, they get replaced by smaller businesses & your burden remains the same (local economies also improve)
This is a position that has strict upsides for you & you're against it.
You one of those "I'll be rich someday"fools?
A. Tax the rich and your burden goes down
Or
B. Tax the rich, they leave, they get replaced by smaller businesses & your burden remains the same (local economies also improve)
This is a position that has strict upsides for you & you're against it.
You one of those "I'll be rich someday"fools?
June 27, 2025 at 4:48 PM
Either
A. Tax the rich and your burden goes down
Or
B. Tax the rich, they leave, they get replaced by smaller businesses & your burden remains the same (local economies also improve)
This is a position that has strict upsides for you & you're against it.
You one of those "I'll be rich someday"fools?
A. Tax the rich and your burden goes down
Or
B. Tax the rich, they leave, they get replaced by smaller businesses & your burden remains the same (local economies also improve)
This is a position that has strict upsides for you & you're against it.
You one of those "I'll be rich someday"fools?
Businesses. Arguing against placing highest tax burden on the wealthiest members of society "because they might leave" is arguing based on "vibes", not real life example. And them being around but not paying their fair share only harms us (anti competitive policies, monopolies, etc.)
June 27, 2025 at 4:40 PM
Businesses. Arguing against placing highest tax burden on the wealthiest members of society "because they might leave" is arguing based on "vibes", not real life example. And them being around but not paying their fair share only harms us (anti competitive policies, monopolies, etc.)
It takes money to keep a society functional. The most sensible thing to do is to place the majority of that burden on the most wealthy, who are impacted by it the least.
You haven't shown evidence of that supposed mass Exodus.
But even if that happened, vacuums get filled with other people and other
You haven't shown evidence of that supposed mass Exodus.
But even if that happened, vacuums get filled with other people and other
June 27, 2025 at 4:38 PM
It takes money to keep a society functional. The most sensible thing to do is to place the majority of that burden on the most wealthy, who are impacted by it the least.
You haven't shown evidence of that supposed mass Exodus.
But even if that happened, vacuums get filled with other people and other
You haven't shown evidence of that supposed mass Exodus.
But even if that happened, vacuums get filled with other people and other
??? Wanna explain how me saying the democrats aiding and abetting genocide is me criticizing the left?
June 27, 2025 at 1:29 PM
??? Wanna explain how me saying the democrats aiding and abetting genocide is me criticizing the left?
If you want to increase quality of life for you and your kin, you want your taxes to maintain a standard of living to maximize how many citizens can spec into med & tech. You want to invest in your future.
Licking the boot doesn't do any of that.
Licking the boot doesn't do any of that.
June 27, 2025 at 1:27 PM
If you want to increase quality of life for you and your kin, you want your taxes to maintain a standard of living to maximize how many citizens can spec into med & tech. You want to invest in your future.
Licking the boot doesn't do any of that.
Licking the boot doesn't do any of that.
Everybody claims taxes make talent leave, but nobody shows any data to prove this. If it was true, we would see some pretty massive movements between countries, which we just don't see.
And at smaller scale, you can look at cities and states that enable wealth tax and nobody leaves.
And at smaller scale, you can look at cities and states that enable wealth tax and nobody leaves.
June 27, 2025 at 1:19 PM
Everybody claims taxes make talent leave, but nobody shows any data to prove this. If it was true, we would see some pretty massive movements between countries, which we just don't see.
And at smaller scale, you can look at cities and states that enable wealth tax and nobody leaves.
And at smaller scale, you can look at cities and states that enable wealth tax and nobody leaves.
Prove to me taxes turn talent away
And prove to me the most wealthy are more intelligent. (They are not. The only difference is the willingness to engage in slavery. That's not being smart. It's having worse ethics.)
And prove to me the most wealthy are more intelligent. (They are not. The only difference is the willingness to engage in slavery. That's not being smart. It's having worse ethics.)
June 27, 2025 at 1:16 PM
Prove to me taxes turn talent away
And prove to me the most wealthy are more intelligent. (They are not. The only difference is the willingness to engage in slavery. That's not being smart. It's having worse ethics.)
And prove to me the most wealthy are more intelligent. (They are not. The only difference is the willingness to engage in slavery. That's not being smart. It's having worse ethics.)
US has the billionaires and isn't adequately taxing the billionaires, so the only people benefiting from that arrangement are the billionaires.
What's the purpose of drawing wealth if it's not taxed? and their monopolies are actively harmful. It's a net loss.
What's the purpose of drawing wealth if it's not taxed? and their monopolies are actively harmful. It's a net loss.
June 27, 2025 at 1:15 PM
US has the billionaires and isn't adequately taxing the billionaires, so the only people benefiting from that arrangement are the billionaires.
What's the purpose of drawing wealth if it's not taxed? and their monopolies are actively harmful. It's a net loss.
What's the purpose of drawing wealth if it's not taxed? and their monopolies are actively harmful. It's a net loss.
You're the one saying leftists and liberals shouldn't work together...and hung up on a joke...
June 27, 2025 at 2:21 AM
You're the one saying leftists and liberals shouldn't work together...and hung up on a joke...
Also if you are arguing the entire Republican party is licking the trump boot, and that party is in the majority, you're unwittingly arguing we're "cooked." And if that's the case? We flew past the guns & bombs part of this story.
June 27, 2025 at 1:44 AM
Also if you are arguing the entire Republican party is licking the trump boot, and that party is in the majority, you're unwittingly arguing we're "cooked." And if that's the case? We flew past the guns & bombs part of this story.
You're the one asserting leftists and liberals are at odds. I'm just explaining the ethical divide between the two groups, to make the distinction easier to understand.
June 27, 2025 at 1:42 AM
You're the one asserting leftists and liberals are at odds. I'm just explaining the ethical divide between the two groups, to make the distinction easier to understand.
The "strife" is over things like the genocide in Palestine. Which, again, if you can't draw a line at fascism??
Also, it's not leftists dividing us up. I told you: we are forced into voting for Democrats.
So it sounds kinda like discovering people have different ideas and not tolerating it..?
Also, it's not leftists dividing us up. I told you: we are forced into voting for Democrats.
So it sounds kinda like discovering people have different ideas and not tolerating it..?
June 27, 2025 at 1:11 AM
The "strife" is over things like the genocide in Palestine. Which, again, if you can't draw a line at fascism??
Also, it's not leftists dividing us up. I told you: we are forced into voting for Democrats.
So it sounds kinda like discovering people have different ideas and not tolerating it..?
Also, it's not leftists dividing us up. I told you: we are forced into voting for Democrats.
So it sounds kinda like discovering people have different ideas and not tolerating it..?
Materially, their difference from Republicans is...they are not outright voting for laws that further oppress citizens. But every time they are in power, they don't push through any of the agenda they run on.
Local politicians believe in making things better, and then come up against the machine.
Local politicians believe in making things better, and then come up against the machine.
June 27, 2025 at 1:08 AM
Materially, their difference from Republicans is...they are not outright voting for laws that further oppress citizens. But every time they are in power, they don't push through any of the agenda they run on.
Local politicians believe in making things better, and then come up against the machine.
Local politicians believe in making things better, and then come up against the machine.
👆🏼
The people holding abortion hostage are not our allies. The people who never put anything into law when they have majority to do so are not our allies.
The people holding abortion hostage are not our allies. The people who never put anything into law when they have majority to do so are not our allies.
June 27, 2025 at 12:24 AM
👆🏼
The people holding abortion hostage are not our allies. The people who never put anything into law when they have majority to do so are not our allies.
The people holding abortion hostage are not our allies. The people who never put anything into law when they have majority to do so are not our allies.
Also why is holding the line at fascism dividing your allies?
Why are you on the side of fascism?
And why are YOU the one making this a division, when I said in the first place that I vote for Democrats?
Why are you on the side of fascism?
And why are YOU the one making this a division, when I said in the first place that I vote for Democrats?
June 27, 2025 at 12:09 AM
Also why is holding the line at fascism dividing your allies?
Why are you on the side of fascism?
And why are YOU the one making this a division, when I said in the first place that I vote for Democrats?
Why are you on the side of fascism?
And why are YOU the one making this a division, when I said in the first place that I vote for Democrats?
You know they can talk to Republicans, right? You know they could argue that job security is lower under dictatorship, right? These folks care about money and power, and will respond to threats to their money and power.
And if they are that useless, why are you defending them?
And if they are that useless, why are you defending them?
June 27, 2025 at 12:05 AM
You know they can talk to Republicans, right? You know they could argue that job security is lower under dictatorship, right? These folks care about money and power, and will respond to threats to their money and power.
And if they are that useless, why are you defending them?
And if they are that useless, why are you defending them?
Side note: you can increase taxes and expect influx of talent because the higher taxes are footing the bill of higher quality of life, which MANY people want access to.
June 26, 2025 at 11:52 PM
Side note: you can increase taxes and expect influx of talent because the higher taxes are footing the bill of higher quality of life, which MANY people want access to.
Oh no, buddy, intelligence does not correlate with income, after a point.
And if you are trying to attract wealth but not tax wealth, you are filling up space with non taxable garbage, which isn't financially serving the nation.
And if you are trying to attract wealth but not tax wealth, you are filling up space with non taxable garbage, which isn't financially serving the nation.
June 26, 2025 at 11:50 PM
Oh no, buddy, intelligence does not correlate with income, after a point.
And if you are trying to attract wealth but not tax wealth, you are filling up space with non taxable garbage, which isn't financially serving the nation.
And if you are trying to attract wealth but not tax wealth, you are filling up space with non taxable garbage, which isn't financially serving the nation.
Ergo isn't a good use of latin. It's fewer characters than "therefore" and a delta (∆) would have been even better, but I can't rely on people knowing basic math.
But all this is high school civics, which makes it all the more embarrassing.
But all this is high school civics, which makes it all the more embarrassing.
June 26, 2025 at 11:34 PM
Ergo isn't a good use of latin. It's fewer characters than "therefore" and a delta (∆) would have been even better, but I can't rely on people knowing basic math.
But all this is high school civics, which makes it all the more embarrassing.
But all this is high school civics, which makes it all the more embarrassing.
Oh, I don't know, abuse of power in a military strike on Iran, a power reserved for congress, not executive branch?
You're defending Democrats who voted no, btw. It costs nothing to vote to impeach him and YET.
Never mind constant evidence of treason and bribes. It's trivial to impeach him. And yet
You're defending Democrats who voted no, btw. It costs nothing to vote to impeach him and YET.
Never mind constant evidence of treason and bribes. It's trivial to impeach him. And yet
June 26, 2025 at 11:32 PM
Oh, I don't know, abuse of power in a military strike on Iran, a power reserved for congress, not executive branch?
You're defending Democrats who voted no, btw. It costs nothing to vote to impeach him and YET.
Never mind constant evidence of treason and bribes. It's trivial to impeach him. And yet
You're defending Democrats who voted no, btw. It costs nothing to vote to impeach him and YET.
Never mind constant evidence of treason and bribes. It's trivial to impeach him. And yet
Hey look at the latest vote to impeach and tell me how many of each party voted "for" and "against."
Trump could have been impeached MULTIPLE times because of his MULTIPLE serious offenses.
He's not impeached.
Ergo, we cannot rely on Democrats to get us out of this.
Trump could have been impeached MULTIPLE times because of his MULTIPLE serious offenses.
He's not impeached.
Ergo, we cannot rely on Democrats to get us out of this.
June 26, 2025 at 11:16 PM
Hey look at the latest vote to impeach and tell me how many of each party voted "for" and "against."
Trump could have been impeached MULTIPLE times because of his MULTIPLE serious offenses.
He's not impeached.
Ergo, we cannot rely on Democrats to get us out of this.
Trump could have been impeached MULTIPLE times because of his MULTIPLE serious offenses.
He's not impeached.
Ergo, we cannot rely on Democrats to get us out of this.