If the foo shiats.

It doesn't help if you are using a cogent analogy if Nazi's are involved.

You know something is bullshiat when Grover Norquist says it.

because godwining always makes a situation better

Taxes are equivalent to racial and societal genocide?

I can't wait for the next step, where taxes will be a sin, and the "elect" shouldn't be dragged down with the sinners.

I think ol' Grover's just pissed because someone made his escape plan illegal before he was done sucking the last drop of blood from the nation.

Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

I still can't believe that 90% of all republicans continue to slob this clown's knob.

"When even Speaker Boehner feels free to openly disagree with Grover Norquist, it is official that literally no one cares what Norquist thinks on this issue,"

LOL

Thank goodness Frank Gaffney has exposed Norquist as being a stooge of the Muslim Brotherhood.

/stirring the shiat

Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?

Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

So Grover can slander the bill by saying that it's something the Nazis would pass, but Schumer can't complain about his comparison because...

// fark man, that's the most disingenuous argument I've ever heard

Sock Ruh Tease: Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?

Because they pay them and bring them on trips and totally like them.

Conservatives finally admit that the PATRIOT Act was bad?

Sock Ruh Tease: Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?

They just know that Rulers don't have to be bound by rules meant for Servants.

If several billion dollars can really be transferred from investors to one guy, permanently, our system is already so broken that you can't blame him for getting out.

Jackson Herring: Although there's no reason we shouldn't try.

Actually, yea, there are plenty of reasons we shouldn't try. Not the least of which being, for me, that I don't want to face my own exit taxes in the event I ever decide I need or want to leave the U.S.

I'm sympathetic to the outrage around the fact that people like Saverin basically use the U.S. to get wealthy and then jumped ship to avoid paying back into the system that helped him become so wildly successful, but I have a really hard time seeing a way this could be implemented without being used specifically as a punishment for leaving, and for me that falls under the canopy of "precedents we shouldn't be setting". Saverin is clearly an asshole, but I'm more concerned about the future potential for abuse of a tool like this than I am getting back at that knob.

That said, Norquist is a complete and utter twat and his twatting didn't twat any less when he twatted this current twatwaddle.

/ and I hope Saverin falls astray of some minor law in Singapore and get a nasty caning.... dickhead

How about we let Saverin go, declare war on Singapore, conquer it in about a minute and a half, then seize all his assets as reparations?

I still can't believe all the herp a derp from both sides over a guy who wasn't born here, no longer lives here, and seemingly intends to not return renouncing his citizenship.

If the tax system wasn't setup to allow the mega-wealthy to avoid paying taxes while they live here, then the circumstances of their leaving wouldn't matter and there's be no need to try and tax them or otherwise penalize them as they make their getaway renounce their citizenship and leave the country.

I'm amazed at how many things are analogous to Hitler and Nazis. Such as Grover Norquist is like Hitler because he's a vile little man that spews repugnant half truths to suit his own narrative.

Splinshints: Not the least of which being, for me, that I don't want to face my own exit taxes in the event I ever decide I need or want to leave the U.S.

Everyone that does it takes a hit based on current laws. This new stuff is targeting the well heeled for a bigger piece.

I don't necessarily agree with it, but I understand the motivation.

Johnny Swank: I still can't believe that 90% of all republicans continue to slob this clown's knob.

TO be fair to grover, 90% of all republicans are gayer than elmo.

Why Nazi's, why not slavery????

Oh yeah.

Babwa Wawa: This equally applicable both sides - the right will get jumped on for pointing out the similarities between the left's gun policies and fascist gun policies.

Of course this is an utterly dishonest comparison with no basis in historical reality.

That Saverin guy's an asshole, bailing on this country to avoid paying capital gains taxes, of all things. The guy's a billionaire, and thinks 15% on his latest boondoggle's just way too burdensome, because he's super rich, and therefore better than us plebes. But instead of this law, why not just frame him for child molestation, human organ harvesting, human trafficking, and drug dealing? I'm sure the CIA could pull it off, easily. For that matter, the CIA should do things like that more often, it would make them way cooler.

/C'mon CIA, be cool man!

Summercat: Didn't Saverin move to Singapore in '09?>

Sometime just after mid-January?

Sock Ruh Tease: Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?

To be fair, what has America done for him lately? Besides providing him the educational and financial environment to make billions of dollars. That was so last week.

vsavatar: If the foo shiats.

wildcardjack: It doesn't help if you are using a cogent analogy if Nazi's are involved.

Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Wellon Dowd: It's not a tax, it's a Freedom Fee.

Frank N Stein: [oi46.tinypic.com image 275x492]

You misspelled "BRB, signing back on with other handle."

Corporatists: American debts, Global profits!

dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

Only the current GOP would compare trying to close a tax loophole with the holocaust. This type of greed is evil.

Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

You're right, he didn't compare Schumer to the Nazis, but he invited the comparison. The difference between the two is paper thin.

Make More Hinjews: You misspelled "BRB, signing back on with other handle."

"Herp derp anything that doesn't appeal to my fragile senses must be the work of some well determined troll"

PS: How can you misspell something when you didn't even write anything?

Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

Liberalism = Government
Lack of Government = Good
Social Darwinism = Good

I learned some things today!

/ I'm just saying, they miss you over at Stormfront.

// That's all I'm saying.

Every time I hear about Norquist and the Republican party that he so firmly grasps in his pudgy, little hand, I think of Charles Mackay.

Frank N Stein: Make More Hinjews: You misspelled "BRB, signing back on with other handle."

"Herp derp anything that doesn't appeal to my fragile senses must be the work of some well determined troll"

PS: How can you misspell something when you didn't even write anything?

Wow, clever. You're right, a picture isn't a misspelling... vote Republican.

Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

Hmmm. Upon rereading, that came out worse than I thought. I'm trying to just do a little philosophical thought exercise, but this paragraph can be debunked pretty easily.

For shame, me.

Make More Hinjews: Liberalism = Government
Lack of Government = Good
Social Darwinism = Good

I learned some things today!

/ I'm just saying, they miss you over at Stormfront.

// That's all I'm saying.


I'm not saying what's good or bad. That argument hinges on the fact that government isn't human's natural state.

And you can go fark yourself with your stormfront accusation.

Frank N Stein: Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

Hmmm. Upon rereading, that came out worse than I thought. I'm trying to just do a little philosophical thought exercise, but this paragraph can be debunked pretty easily.

For shame, me.

At least you admitted it. ;)

Frank N Stein: Hmmm. Upon rereading, that came out worse than I thought. I'm trying to just do a little philosophical thought exercise, but this paragraph can be debunked pretty easily.

For shame, me.

Your post was bad, and you should feel bad.

dookdookdook: Norquist told The Hill: "I think Schumer can probably find the legislation to do this. It existed in Germany in the 1930s and Rhodesia in the'70s and South Africa as well. He probably just plagerized it and translated it from the original German."
...
UPDATE: A member of Norquist's team denies the comparison to Nazism. "Schumer's claim about Grover's comments are simply not true," Americans for Tax Reform communications director John Kartch said in an email. "He did not compare the Ex-Patriot act to Nazism."

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

I can't decide in which way Norquist is wrong here. While he didn't explicitly state Nazi Germany, he said 1930's Germany, which just screams Nazi. However, then he only mentions East Germany, which was under Soviet control, Soviet-style exit taxes, and Communist education. However, East Germany didn't exist in the 1930's.

Maybe he should have paid more attention in history class instead of writing his little pledge.

Frank N Stein: That argument hinges on the fact that government isn't human's natural state.

How so? We weren't prodded into governing by aliens (oh god, please don't think we were prodded into governing by aliens). We came up with it on our own. I'll grant that it's learned behavior, but learned behavior is still natural.

Is it unnatural that some dolphins know how to herd schools of fish into easy kill zones while others don't? What's the difference between them learning new behavior and us doing the same?

Remember when the Republicans/Conservatives had as their unofficial motto: "America, Love it or Leave It!"? If you remember correctly, they had all kinds of derision for those who actually "left if."

Now they stand there and basically openly support someone who would basically turn their back on their country and fellow citizens for a few pieces of silver. I'm fine with Saverin (and fellow travelers going ex-pat) and don't consider it much of a loss. But I do have a problem with folks like him taking advantage of all of the benefits provided to him by the same government/citizens/society who now chooses to simply avoid paying taxes on the money created from those benefits and a tax policy in place which allows them to do so. The taxes should remain the same whether he retains his citizenship or not: pay the taxes on the amount you earned here = go to Singapore with your net earnings and THEN never pay US taxes again.

Frank N Stein: Make More Hinjews: Liberalism = Government
Lack of Government = Good
Social Darwinism = Good

I learned some things today!

/ I'm just saying, they miss you over at Stormfront.

// That's all I'm saying.


I'm not saying what's good or bad. That argument hinges on the fact that government isn't human's natural state.

And you can go fark yourself with your stormfront accusation.

Sure it is. Some form of government has been part of every human society. A clan or tribal structure is a form of government. Anarchy is profoundly unnatural to humans.

Frank N Stein: Make More Hinjews: Liberalism = Government
Lack of Government = Good
Social Darwinism = Good

I learned some things today!

/ I'm just saying, they miss you over at Stormfront.

// That's all I'm saying.

I'm not saying what's good or bad. That argument hinges on the fact that government isn't human's natural state.

And you can go fark yourself with your stormfront accusation.


I'm sorry, I just got confused by your vocabulary. I haven't heard somebody praise "social Darwinism" so nonchalantly since my last meeting of the German-American Bund.

My mistake!

the opposite of charity is justice: [0.tqn.com image 500x328]

I think it's better to error on the side that you can never be completely sure someone is not hitler. That would be a costly mistake after all.

Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

If "social" darwinism was still a major factor there would be a lot less dumb @sses running around because physical fitness doesn't apply to life/death situations in our society.

[Deleted a paragraph explaining, but realized the first sentance says it all]

Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

It's still a stupid argument. It's like saying the Interstate Highway System is bad because Nazi Germany approved of the Autobahn.

Frank N Stein: What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

Wow. I never thought I could accurately call something Aristotelian bullshiat before.

There's more to reality than raw physical laws, and saying everything boils down to physics and biology is to ignore the very existence of civilization. The very development of technology and community is the active resistance of "natural law" by employing unnatural methods to beat the system. Growing food instead of foraging. Communicating verbally to spread complex ideas. Medicine. Electricity. We've shaped reality over thousands of years to make it so that natural selection doesn't apply, and we've developed a generally accepted belief that even if it is not our moral responsibility to keep even the lest of us taken care of on some level, then it is our pragmatic responsibility to keep the structure of society that we enjoy.

How skewed is your moral compass that you think social darwinism is the ideal state of the world?

Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

No Real American would voluntarily stay in America to help other Americans.

Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

We've literally reached the point where conservatives think the well-being of rich non-Americans is more important than America itself.

Sock Ruh Tease

Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?




Do they hate America - or maybe just the current administration?

Fart_Machine: Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

It's still a stupid argument. It's like saying the Interstate Highway System is bad because Nazi Germany approved of the Autobahn.

Or that socialized medicine is bad because Nazi Germany approved of socialized medicine. I recall this argument being advanced during the debate about health care reform; I wouldn't be surprised if opponents of the IHS made the same argument back when it was in the planning stages.

thurstonxhowell: Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

You're right, he didn't compare Schumer to the Nazis, but he invited the comparison. The difference between the two is paper thin.

Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

In any case, yeah, he knew exactly what he was doing by comparing it to 1930's Germany. Nobody thinks of that era and start with Weimar. People automatically think Nazi when they think of that timeframe. If he really wanted to make it clear what he was referring to, he could have specifically mentioned Weimar in his original quote or mentioned the specific law he was referring to.

Bloody William: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

We've literally reached the point where conservatives think the well-being of rich non-Americans is more important than America itself.

When your value system has one value and one value only, and that value is Wealth, it's the logical end point.

Serious Black: thurstonxhowell: Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

You're right, he didn't compare Schumer to the Nazis, but he invited the comparison. The difference between the two is paper thin.

Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

In any case, yeah, he knew exactly what he was doing by comparing it to 1930's Germany. Nobody thinks of that era and start with Weimar. People automatically think Nazi when they think of that timeframe. If he really wanted to make it clear what he was referring to, he could have specifically mentioned Weimar in his original quote or mentioned the specific law he was referring to.

Wait, they actually called it the Ex-Patriot Act? Brilliant.

Serious Black: Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

Seriously. I thought that post sounded weird coming from you.

It's not even the perception of 1930s Germany and nobody thinking of Weimar. IT's the ignorance of the target audience of these statements, who think Stalin and Hitler worked together through the 1930's until America defeated them despite FDR making the war last long, then the Russians carried on the Nazi philosophy and called it communism until Ronald Reagan beat them. Do you really think many tea partiers or other right-wing assholes who parrot this stuff have even heard of the Weimar Republic or the Treaty of Versailles?

Bloody William: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

We've literally reached the point where conservatives think the well-being of rich non-Americans is more important than America itself.


Hell, we reached that when we decided to occupy an oil-rich nation while reducing revenue to pay for it.

qorkfiend: Serious Black: thurstonxhowell: Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

You're right, he didn't compare Schumer to the Nazis, but he invited the comparison. The difference between the two is paper thin.

Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

In any case, yeah, he knew exactly what he was doing by comparing it to 1930's Germany. Nobody thinks of that era and start with Weimar. People automatically think Nazi when they think of that timeframe. If he really wanted to make it clear what he was referring to, he could have specifically mentioned Weimar in his original quote or mentioned the specific law he was referring to.

Wait, they actually called it the Ex-Patriot Act? Brilliant.

Yeah, I gotta admit that I thought it was kind of clever too.

Philip Francis Queeg: Bloody William: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

We've literally reached the point where conservatives think the well-being of rich non-Americans is more important than America itself.

When your value system has one value and one value only, and that value is Wealth, it's the logical end point.


It's how Jesus would have wanted it.

Bloody William: Serious Black: Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

Seriously. I thought that post sounded weird coming from you.

It's not even the perception of 1930s Germany and nobody thinking of Weimar. IT's the ignorance of the target audience of these statements, who think Stalin and Hitler worked together through the 1930's until America defeated them despite FDR making the war last long, then the Russians carried on the Nazi philosophy and called it communism until Ronald Reagan beat them. Do you really think many tea partiers or other right-wing assholes who parrot this stuff have even heard of the Weimar Republic or the Treaty of Versailles?

Hell, they probably don't even know there was a 20-year span between WWI and WWII.

Serious Black: Yeah, but Grover didn't actually compare Schumer or the Ex-Patriot Act to the Nazis. He just said that it was a bill that 1930's Germany, whose government was controlled by the Nazis, would pass and be proud of. There's a huge difference between the two.

Completely incorrect.

He said it EXISTED in Germany, and that Schumer "probably just...translated it from the original German."

"I think Schumer can probably find the legislation to do this. It existed in Germany in the 1930s and Rhodesia in the '70s and South Africa as well. He probably just plagiarized it and translated it from the original German."

Serious Black: Bloody William: Serious Black: Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

Seriously. I thought that post sounded weird coming from you.

It's not even the perception of 1930s Germany and nobody thinking of Weimar. IT's the ignorance of the target audience of these statements, who think Stalin and Hitler worked together through the 1930's until America defeated them despite FDR making the war last long, then the Russians carried on the Nazi philosophy and called it communism until Ronald Reagan beat them. Do you really think many tea partiers or other right-wing assholes who parrot this stuff have even heard of the Weimar Republic or the Treaty of Versailles?

Hell, they probably don't even know there was a 20-year span between WWI and WWII.

I think they do, if only because they know the Depression and the New Deal happened sometime before WWII.

On a side note, how terrible must it have been for WWI veterans to finally get home, settle down, and start a family, only to watch their sons go off to fight WWII?

Serious Black: Bloody William: Serious Black: Perhaps I should have ended my post with a sarcasm slashie...

Seriously. I thought that post sounded weird coming from you.

It's not even the perception of 1930s Germany and nobody thinking of Weimar. IT's the ignorance of the target audience of these statements, who think Stalin and Hitler worked together through the 1930's until America defeated them despite FDR making the war last long, then the Russians carried on the Nazi philosophy and called it communism until Ronald Reagan beat them. Do you really think many tea partiers or other right-wing assholes who parrot this stuff have even heard of the Weimar Republic or the Treaty of Versailles?

Hell, they probably don't even know there was a 20-year span between WWI and WWII.

They probably don't even know there was a WWI!

Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

I reject your reality and perceive my own!

qorkfiend: I think they do, if only because they know the Depression and the New Deal happened sometime before WWII.

No, the New Deal happened, then the Depression. If it wasn't for FDR, it would have lasted a weekend.

GOP: Patriot Act nullifies your constitutional rights as long as the folks in power say so.....totally American.

GOP: Ex-Patriot Act closes a tax loophole for the uber rich......facism!!!!

FARK THE GOP and fark Obama for not repealling the Patriot Act.

Summercat: [www.wired.com image 640x476]

Also, if he's a billionare, why can't he afford the good parts for his robot?

You gotta search every screen for blue chip things dude.

Bloody William: qorkfiend: I think they do, if only because they know the Depression and the New Deal happened sometime before WWII.

No, the New Deal happened, then the Depression. If it wasn't for FDR, it would have lasted a weekend.

Right, right. I sometimes get my historical revisionism mixed up. The New Deal was for the slaves freed voluntarily by the Confederacy after they fought the Union to a standstill, right?

qorkfiend: On a side note, how terrible must it have been for WWI veterans to finally get home, die of Spanish flu and encephilatis, settle down, starve to death in the depression, and start a family, only to watch their sons go off to fight WWII, then invent the Slinky?

FTFY

I agree... The Patriot Act is a disgusting...

Holy shiat, he's talking about the EX Patriot Act???

qorkfiend: Bloody William: qorkfiend: I think they do, if only because they know the Depression and the New Deal happened sometime before WWII.

No, the New Deal happened, then the Depression. If it wasn't for FDR, it would have lasted a weekend.

Right, right. I sometimes get my historical revisionism mixed up. The New Deal was for the slaves freed voluntarily by the Confederacy after they fought the Union to a standstill, right?

No, after the Confederacy fought back against the invading Union. Why do you think it's called the War of Northern Aggression?

Terrified Asexual Forcemeat: qorkfiend: On a side note, how terrible must it have been for WWI veterans to finally get home, die of Spanish flu and encephilatis, settle down, starve to death in the depression, and start a family, only to watch their sons go off to fight WWII, then invent the Slinky?

FTFY

Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

WOW, too bad Plato, Socrates, et al.... couldnt have sat at your feet and gazed in wonder at what modern man has become...

/ This is what repuglicans really believe
//You have to destroy Reality to save lt...

Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

yeah, the idea of freedom is just so non-American.

leave it to the dems to continue with their thought crimes legislation attempts (you get the exit tax if your reason for leaving was based on taxes).

Heraclitus: //You have to destroy Reality to save lt...

Both sides are bad, so vote Superboy Prime.

rebelyell2006: Conservatives finally admit that the PATRIOT Act was bad?

Someone didn't rtfa.

Although why do Republicans want to encourage expatriation at all?

tenpoundsofcheese: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

yeah, the idea of freedom is just so non-American.

leave it to the dems to continue with their thought crimes legislation attempts (you get the exit tax if your reason for leaving was based on taxes).

Dude, even John Boehner thinks what Saverin did was deplorable. Is he a RINO now?

Serious Black: Dude, even John Boehner thinks what Saverin did was deplorable. Is he a RINO now?

He's a house speaker who half the party wants to oust because he could only get 98% of what they wanted in the last budget talks, do you really need to ask? All Republicans are RINOs the moment they step out of line on any issue.

On the contrary, not only should these people not have to pay extra taxes they should be given an incentive to leave the country. Tell us your total net worth, we'll double it, then hand over your passport and get the fark out of the USA. Go move to Namibia or Somalia or Qatar or whatever foreign tax haven you want, just don't ever dare show your sorry face in this country again. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

tenpoundsofcheese: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

yeah, the idea of freedom leaving the country and renouncing your citizenship is just so non-American.


Your argument really makes no sense in the context of this thread.
But look at who I'm responding to.

Sock Ruh Tease: I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?

Because money is more important to the 'Pubs than patriotism, no matter what they say at their rallies.

Aracnix: rebelyell2006: Conservatives finally admit that the PATRIOT Act was bad?

Someone didn't rtfa.

Although why do Republicans want to encourage expatriation at all?


They are only encouraging it for rich Americans. That way they have a fall-back plan if America goes the way they're hoping.

qorkfiend: On a side note, how terrible must it have been for WWI veterans to finally get home, settle down, and start a family, only to watch their sons go off to fight WWII?

At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

Frank N Stein: Frank N Stein: dookdookdook: Reality has a well known liberal bias.

What is reality? Barring the endless philosophical debates on what consists of reality, it can be safely said that reality is essentially the combination of the laws of the physical universe and our perception of those laws. Those physical laws (and our perception) are specific to us and all living things in the biological laws which govern continual existence, i.e natural selection. Seeing as how modern day liberalism (and really, societal/governments in general) seeks to mitigate those laws of natural selection in human society (social Darwinism), this comes as an affront reality as known throughout nature. Therefore, liberalism (and all forms of government) is an attempt to distort and combat the laws of nature.

There, your bumper sticker slogan has been debunked.

Hmmm. Upon rereading, that came out worse than I thought. I'm trying to just do a little philosophical thought exercise, but this paragraph can be debunked pretty easily.

For shame, me.

Wait, that wasn't supposed to be comedy? Too bad, it really was a successful satire of the insanity that goes on in the minds of modern day republicans.

Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

PanicMan: qorkfiend: On a side note, how terrible must it have been for WWI veterans to finally get home, settle down, and start a family, only to watch their sons go off to fight WWII?

At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

And that 25% is overwhelmingly concentrated in young, healthy males, who would otherwise be the backbone of the economy. The major powers of Europe lost two entire generations in the early half of the 20th century. It's completely mind-boggling.

Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

Unless you are Mexican , of course.

Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

That's fine; just don't try to portray abandoning your country as "patriotism". It's not. It's barefaced self-interest.

Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

The ancient Greeks also thought that everyone needed to voice their opinion on what their political system did and molded a direct democratic system to ensure this happened and prevent people from leaving without first having their voice heard.

Jackson Herring: Good lord, there aren't enough dicks fires in the known universe for Grover Norquist to choke on die in. Although there's no reason we shouldn't try.

just coverin all the bases heah.

Serious Black: Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

The ancient Greeks also thought that everyone needed to voice their opinion on what their political system did and molded a direct democratic system to ensure this happened and prevent people from leaving without first having their voice heard.

That would be the Athenians, not all ancient Greeks. Other city-states did things differently. This setup -a federation of a number of different societies- is why the freedom to move was considered so important: someone who could not tolerate one social system could find another.

Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.


A system republicans have cultivated for the past 30 years? That's like smearing feces on every wall in your bathroom, then exercising your "right" to use the neighbor's john from now on.
Understand, I'm not against leaving the country if you're dissatisfied. I'm against the Right's insistence that this is the best thing to do to avoid taxes.

Bloody William: Heraclitus: //You have to destroy Reality to save lt...

Both sides are bad, so vote Superboy Prime.

Geoff Johns does not need any more power.

/Both sides are actually the same higher dimensional ovum readying us for the chaos of true eternal freedom
/So vote Grant Morrison maybe

Lord_Baull: A system republicans have cultivated for the past 30 years?
And which a lot of people have put a lot of emotional investment into tearing down.

Ultimately, the freedom to leave has, for a very long time, been cherished by the Republicans and their philosophical ancestors. It's why they consistently listed inability to leave the Soviet Union as one of its key atrocities. It's the entire basis of the "love it or leave it" mentality. It's also key to their position on states' rights: avoiding legal monoculture makes it possible for people to do this within the same country. Opposing the Ex-PATRIOT act may seem counterintuitive, but not only is it consistent with Republican ideals, it may be the most internally-consistent thing the Republicans have done since at least 2008, if not longer still.

Jackson Herring: PanicMan: At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

Ah yes, the cowardly surrendering French, am I right?

I know! How dare they die when attacked with mustard gas and artillery! What a bunch of pussys!

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Grove, my man, if you wish to emigrate, we'll give you an exception.

I hear Somalia has low, LOW taxes.

Bloody William: No, the New Deal happened, then the Depression. If it wasn't for FDR Federal Reserve , it would have lasted a weekend.

Ask Ben Bernanke. He'll tell you what happened.

Link

It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function. The problem within the Fed was largely doctrinal: Fed officials appeared to subscribe to Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's infamous 'liquidationist' thesis, that weeding out "weak" banks was a harsh but necessary prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. Moreover, most of the failing banks were small banks (as opposed to what we would now call money-center banks) and not members of the Federal Reserve System. Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the panics. At the same time, the large banks--which would have intervened before the founding of the Fed--felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility. Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.
...
Thus, as I have always tried to make clear, my argument for nonmonetary influences of bank failures is simply an embellishment of the Friedman-Schwartz story; it in no way contradicts the basic logic of their analysis.
...
Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

Millennium: Lord_Baull: A system republicans have cultivated for the past 30 years?
And which a lot of people have put a lot of emotional investment into tearing down.

Ultimately, the freedom to leave has, for a very long time, been cherished by the Republicans and their philosophical ancestors. It's why they consistently listed inability to leave the Soviet Union as one of its key atrocities. It's the entire basis of the "love it or leave it" mentality. It's also key to their position on states' rights: avoiding legal monoculture makes it possible for people to do this within the same country. Opposing the Ex-PATRIOT act may seem counterintuitive, but not only is it consistent with Republican ideals, it may be the most internally-consistent thing the Republicans have done since at least 2008, if not longer still.

If the "Freedom to leave" is a core part of your political philosophy, wouldn't belief in the "Freedom to enter" be a necessary consequence?

Jackson Herring: PanicMan: At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

Ah yes, the cowardly surrendering French, am I right?

Eh, I don't blame the French for surrendering when German tanks were rolling through Paris.

French military planning, on the other hand...

I just hope people realize, in the context of the Ex-Patriot Act, that there is already an exit tax under Internal Revenue Code section 877A, which requires recognition of gains by various rich folks when they renounce citizenship or residence. Eduardo Saverin already faces a very significant tax bill for this reason. What the new law would add, if an improper tax avoidance purpose is found, is (1) a tax on gain on future investment gains, and (2) a bar from re-entry into the country. The second aspect, to me, sounds spiteful and unnecessary. On the first apsect, it's hard to say how much revenue it would rais from Saverin himself; maybe zero if the stock doesn't go up. (Needless to say, Saverin himself isn't expecting that; he's doing this for a reason; but we don't know how things will go.) Maybe it will raise a little more here and there from others.

People seem to have this impression that under current law, there are multimillionaires and billionaires who get to move to Bermuda and never pay a dime of taxes again. Ain't true.

Millennium: Serious Black: Millennium: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

The freedom to get out of a system you can no longer tolerate staying in is a core right. To the ancient Greeks, in fact, it was considered the core right: the basis on which they called themselves free.

The ancient Greeks also thought that everyone needed to voice their opinion on what their political system did and molded a direct democratic system to ensure this happened and prevent people from leaving without first having their voice heard.

That would be the Athenians, not all ancient Greeks. Other city-states did things differently. This setup -a federation of a number of different societies- is why the freedom to move was considered so important: someone who could not tolerate one social system could find another.

Pretty much every Greek city-state that didn't use a complete form of direct democracy randomly drew a large number of people from the citizenry to serve as the democratic decision-making body. It's still a pretty clear form of direct democracy.

Just what sort of power does Grover Norquist hold over these republicans? He's not in any elected or even appointed government office. He's not even a stinking rich super billionaire.

And BTW Grover? Either go the rest of the way and grow a full beard or shave that sh*t off! It looks like you've glued pubes onto your face!

So some people say "If you don't like it why don't you just leave?" (ie love it or leave it, a very progressive idea indeed).

Now some people are saying "Fine. I'll leave and renounce my citizenship."

And the answer is "Well, since you're so un-patriotic, now you have to lose a percentage of your wealth on the way out."

You don't care whether they go or stay. All you want is more money for the government. For some reason, that makes you feel better. Or is it that some rich guy got his money taken by the government and that's what makes you feel better?

Super Chronic: I just hope people realize, in the context of the Ex-Patriot Act, that there is already an exit tax under Internal Revenue Code section 877A, which requires recognition of gains by various rich folks when they renounce citizenship or residence. Eduardo Saverin already faces a very significant tax bill for this reason. What the new law would add, if an improper tax avoidance purpose is found, is (1) a tax on gain on future investment gains, and (2) a bar from re-entry into the country. The second aspect, to me, sounds spiteful and unnecessary. On the first apsect, it's hard to say how much revenue it would rais from Saverin himself; maybe zero if the stock doesn't go up. (Needless to say, Saverin himself isn't expecting that; he's doing this for a reason; but we don't know how things will go.) Maybe it will raise a little more here and there from others.

People seem to have this impression that under current law, there are multimillionaires and billionaires who get to move to Bermuda and never pay a dime of taxes again. Ain't true.

I'm not disputing any of those facts. In fact, I'm pretty sure a bar on re-entry is already part of the US code if you do it for tax reasons. Like John Boehner, I'm not sure whether the bill Schumer has proposed is necessary.

jigger: Or is it that some rich guy who used all of the benefits that living in America provides to make his billions got his money taken by the government when he jumps ship as soon as he's got his and that's what makes you feel better?

Lord_Baull, I was just wondering if you, or anyone else suggesting that republicans are encouraging people to leave to avoid taxes, provide A SINGLE instance of a republican ENCOURAGING anyone to leave the country to avoid taxes. I very much doubt that you can.

Difficulty: saying someone should not be prevented from doing something does not equal encouraging it.

Frank N Stein: "Derp"

qorkfiend: jigger: Or is it that some rich guy who used all of the benefits that living in America provides to make his billions got his money taken by the government when he jumps ship as soon as he's got his and that's what makes you feel better?

Do you use Facebook? You're welcome. If not, what's your problem? The man doesn't owe you anything.

Here's the appropriate wiki article on this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsfluchtsteuer

The Reichsfluchtsteuer ("Reich Flight Tax") was a capital control law implemented in order to stem capital flight from the Weimar Republic. The law was created through decree on 8 December 1931 as part of the "Fourth Decree of the Reich President on the Protection of the Economy and Finance and on the Defense of Civil Peace" ("Vierten [Not-]Verordnung des Reichspräsidenten zur Sicherung von Wirtschaft und Finanzen und zum Schutze des inneren Friedens"), as published in the Reichsgesetzblatt 1931 I, pp. 699-745. The Reichsfluchtsteuer was assessed upon departure from the individual's German domicile, provided that the individual had assets exceeding 200,000 RM or had a yearly income over 20,000 RM. The tax rate was set at 25 percent.

I think Schumer is looking for 30%. Schumer, that's a German name, right?

jigger: qorkfiend: jigger: Or is it that some rich guy who used all of the benefits that living in America provides to make his billions got his money taken by the government when he jumps ship as soon as he's got his and that's what makes you feel better?

Do you use Facebook? You're welcome. If not, what's your problem? The man doesn't owe you anything.

Here's the appropriate wiki article on this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsfluchtsteuer

The Reichsfluchtsteuer ("Reich Flight Tax") was a capital control law implemented in order to stem capital flight from the Weimar Republic. The law was created through decree on 8 December 1931 as part of the "Fourth Decree of the Reich President on the Protection of the Economy and Finance and on the Defense of Civil Peace" ("Vierten [Not-]Verordnung des Reichspräsidenten zur Sicherung von Wirtschaft und Finanzen und zum Schutze des inneren Friedens"), as published in the Reichsgesetzblatt 1931 I, pp. 699-745. The Reichsfluchtsteuer was assessed upon departure from the individual's German domicile, provided that the individual had assets exceeding 200,000 RM or had a yearly income over 20,000 RM. The tax rate was set at 25 percent.

I think Schumer is looking for 30%. Schumer, that's a German name, right?

Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

jigger: Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

Seriously? You think you know Senator Schumer's ethnicity and faith better than he does?

Serious Black: jigger: Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

Seriously? You think you know Senator Schumer's ethnicity and faith better than he does?

Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.

Jackson Herring: uh huh

What a compelling and intelligent defense.

I'm not saying the godwining was appropriate here, but isn't there a point where comparing overbearing govt action to actions taken by the Nazis becomes apropos?

Do we really have to wait until people are being held and executed in camps before we say "wait a minute, this is a bad road we're heading down."?

And really, if you have to pay to leave (or at least prove some govt-approved reason for leaving), aren't we all already in a camp, property of the federal govt? And if the executive branch can order your execution without trial, aren't we all already on death row?

The republicans are just mad that they aren't behind the trigger.

Bloody William: Serious Black: jigger: Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

Seriously? You think you know Senator Schumer's ethnicity and faith better than he does?

Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.

Oh, I know he's a shameless conservative trollbag flamer. I've already tagged him as such. I just like publicly shaming dumbasses.

Serious Black: Bloody William: Serious Black: jigger: Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

Seriously? You think you know Senator Schumer's ethnicity and faith better than he does?

Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.

Oh, I know he's a shameless conservative trollbag flamer. I've already tagged him as such. I just like publicly shaming dumbasses.

I thought that's what I was doing.

iawai: I'm not saying the godwining was appropriate here, but isn't there a point where comparing overbearing govt action to actions taken by the Nazis becomes apropos?

At some point, yes. That point is very, very far from where Grover farking Norquist was drawing it about the suffering of the poor, poor billionaires who want to take advantage of this country's opportunities and treasure and then deny it the revenue it deserves under the law by leaving.

Bloody William: Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.

Schumer is a German name. But, I guess if you don't support his Reichsfluchtsteuer, you must be for the Holocaust.

sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: PanicMan: At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

Ah yes, the cowardly surrendering French, am I right?

You can white knight for France all you want, but 23 million Russian died in WWII. Therefore, Russia better.

Don't forget Poland. They win the award for "highest percentage of population killed during WWII" at ~16.5%. Invaded by both sides. Ouch.

(French deaths during WWII were 1.35% of the population and the USSR almost hit 14%)

Bloody William: Serious Black: jigger: Serious Black: Actually, it's a Jewish name. You know, the same ethnicity as the 6 million people that were brutally exterminated in the Holocaust.

It's German, not Hebrew.

Seriously? You think you know Senator Schumer's ethnicity and faith better than he does?

Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.


To be fair, this is the guy that said if you don't like corporations giving money to SuperPACs, you can just take your investment elsewhere, but offered no advice on how you would find out which corporations are doing it, since there's no legal requirement to divulge that information.

jigger: Bloody William: Observe the rhetorical twist he did. You said Jewish. He said Hebrew. That shows either willful ignorance or he's just trolling. He either honestly doesn't know, or he wanted to shift the discussion away from the unfortunate implications.

Schumer is a German name. But, I guess if you don't support his Reichsfluchtsteuer, you must be for the Holocaust.

My mother's maiden name is Irish. Does that mean she drinks twenty gallons of beer every day? Or did she suddenly start eating nothing but sauerkraut when she got married and took my dad's Polish last name?

Remember when conservatives pooped their Pampers when Superman renounced his US citizenship?

alowishus: Remember when conservatives pooped their Pampers when Superman renounced his US citizenship?

Take a look at the comments from this article. Apparently it's ONLY okay to renounce your citizenship to evade tax duties.

Bloody William: At some point, yes. That point is very, very far from where Grover farking Norquist was drawing it about the suffering of the poor, poor billionaires who want to take advantage of this country's opportunities and treasure and then deny it the revenue it deserves under the law by leaving.

Spoken like a true Reichskanzler.


Lord_Baull: To be fair, this is the guy that said if you don't like corporations giving money to SuperPACs, you can just take your investment elsewhere, but offered no advice on how you would find out which corporations are doing it, since there's no legal requirement to divulge that information.

I probably left the thread long before that point. Some people have shiat to do.

But if you're so concerned about it, ask. If they won't tell you assume that they are. In fact, if it's a corporation, just assume that they're donating to SuperPACs. Don't like it? Don't invest in corporations. Raise a stink. See how many other people give a shiat as much as you and maybe a large number of people will stop investing in those particular corporations. Or if you have shiat to do, put your money to other uses. But that's so damned inconvenient, so I guess the right answer is to use threats and force.

jigger: Bloody William: At some point, yes. That point is very, very far from where Grover farking Norquist was drawing it about the suffering of the poor, poor billionaires who want to take advantage of this country's opportunities and treasure and then deny it the revenue it deserves under the law by leaving.

Spoken like a true Reichskanzler.


Lord_Baull: To be fair, this is the guy that said if you don't like corporations giving money to SuperPACs, you can just take your investment elsewhere, but offered no advice on how you would find out which corporations are doing it, since there's no legal requirement to divulge that information.

I probably left the thread long before that point. Some people have shiat to do.

But if you're so concerned about it, ask. If they won't tell you assume that they are. In fact, if it's a corporation, just assume that they're donating to SuperPACs. Don't like it? Don't invest in corporations. Raise a stink. See how many other people give a shiat as much as you and maybe a large number of people will stop investing in those particular corporations. Or if you have shiat to do, put your money to other uses. But that's so damned inconvenient, so I guess the right answer is to use threats and force.

So when are you emigrating to a freedom loving country like Singapore so that you can free yourself from the tyranny of the United States Government?

Serious Black: My mother's maiden name is Irish. Does that mean she drinks twenty gallons of beer every day? Or did she suddenly start eating nothing but sauerkraut when she got married and took my dad's Polish last name?

If she did drink twenty gallons of beer every day, then that would be very "Irish" of her wouldn't it? Calling for a "Flight Tax" is very much like 1930s German politicians.

(ignored: You might be a Nazi if you disagree.)

farking done.

Philip Francis Queeg: So when are you emigrating to a freedom loving country like Singapore so that you can free yourself from the tyranny of the United States Government?

You think I can afford to move to another country and renounce my citizenship? Do you realize how expensive it is to renounce your citizenship? If I did, it would be someplace tropical, but not Singapore. fark that place.

iawai: I'm not saying the godwining was appropriate here, but isn't there a point where comparing overbearing govt action to actions taken by the Nazis becomes apropos?

Do we really have to wait until people are being held and executed in camps before we say "wait a minute, this is a bad road we're heading down."?

And really, if you have to pay to leave (or at least prove some govt-approved reason for leaving), aren't we all already in a camp, property of the federal govt? And if the executive branch can order your execution without trial, aren't we all already on death row?

The republicans are just mad that they aren't behind the trigger.

Nazi comparisons are an emotional appeal because they unavoidably imply an association with the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany. It is entirely inappropriate when used for things that are not atrocious at all. Yes, the Nazis levied a tax on people leaving the country. They also supported domestic artists, drank beer, and encouraged physical exercise. None of those are directly related to the execution of mass murder or waging war or the violent suppression of its population.

Drawing any possible comparison between what happened in Nazi Germany and modern government is usually a transparent and stupid attempt to smear an idea without debating its actual merits. That's what Grover did and it was just the kind of vapid dickishness that characterizes his political views.

Bloody William: (ignored: You might be a Nazi if you disagree.)

farking done.



vagina

odinsposse: Drawing any possible comparison between what happened in Nazi Germany and modern government is usually a transparent and stupid attempt to smear an idea without debating its actual merits. That's what Grover did and it was just the kind of vapid dickishness that characterizes his political views.

Oooh, that's way better than Nazi. Updating his ignore label to "Vapid dickishness."

I really have no time for such blind Godwinning, and I can see nothing of value come from him in any of the posts on this thread. Nothing but red herrings and muddy watters.

jigger: Philip Francis Queeg: So when are you emigrating to a freedom loving country like Singapore so that you can free yourself from the tyranny of the United States Government?

You think I can afford to move to another country and renounce my citizenship? Do you realize how expensive it is to renounce your citizenship? If I did, it would be someplace tropical, but not Singapore. fark that place.

Ask for asylum. I'm sure any country will recognize how cruelly oppressed you are in the US and welcome you with open arms. Any place would be a bastion of freedom compared to this Nazi country, right?

TheOther: Grove, my man, if you wish to emigrate, we'll give you an exception.

I hear Somalia has low, LOW taxes.

North Korean citizens pay no taxes at all. Since taxation levels are inversely proportional to liberty, North Korea really IS Best Korea.

And their "Homeland Security" is top notch...besides, why would you be worried about government agents if you did nothing wrong?

FuturePastNow: sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: PanicMan: At one point I looked up the number of French casualties between the two wars, it's staggering. IIRC, something like 25% of the population of the country was killed or wounded.

Ah yes, the cowardly surrendering French, am I right?

You can white knight for France all you want, but 23 million Russian died in WWII. Therefore, Russia better.

Don't forget Poland. They win the award for "highest percentage of population killed during WWII" at ~16.5%. Invaded by both sides. Ouch.

(French deaths during WWII were 1.35% of the population and the USSR almost hit 14%)

iawai: I'm not saying the godwining was appropriate here, but isn't there a point where comparing overbearing govt action to actions taken by the Nazis becomes apropos?

Do we really have to wait until people are being held and executed in camps before we say "wait a minute, this is a bad road we're heading down."?

And really, if you have to pay to leave (or at least prove some govt-approved reason for leaving), aren't we all already in a camp, property of the federal govt? And if the executive branch can order your execution without trial, aren't we all already on death row?

The republicans are just mad that they aren't behind the trigger.

Yup first you start with Interstate Highways and move to socialized medicine and soon they're setting up Concentration Camps and giving out free tattoos. It's the natural progression of things.

So the Republicans are trying out do the Libertarians in terms of who can be the biggest whore for the rich?

karnal: Sock Ruh Tease

Mearen: The entire premise of the law is flawed. There are other reasons to give up citizenship.

Yeah, like not loving America enough to stay.

I'd like to know: why do Republicans want to protect people that hate America?


Do they hate America - or maybe just the current administration?

So, it's patriotic to bail on your country - renouncing your farking citizenship - when you don't like the people currently in office?

Aarontology: [i258.photobucket.com image 480x345]

Hah!

This is what anti-tax conservatives actually believe.

runin800m: Lord_Baull, I was just wondering if you, or anyone else suggesting that republicans are encouraging people to leave to avoid taxes, provide A SINGLE instance of a republican ENCOURAGING anyone to leave the country to avoid taxes. I very much doubt that you can.

Difficulty: saying someone should not be prevented from doing something does not equal encouraging it.

So, if someone said that NAMBLA should not be preventing from having young boys at their events, would that be seen negatively?

You know how I know that you know I DNRFA? Because I read the headline as "Patriot Act" instead of "Ex Patriot Act". My initial comment was related to the former, but not the latter. I apologize for sounding conservative. I feel dirty... so very very dirty.

"EX-PATRIOT ACT"? No.

Regular Patriot Act? Absolutely.

vsavatar: You know how I know that you know I DNRFA? Because I read the headline as "Patriot Act" instead of "Ex Patriot Act". My initial comment was related to the former, but not the latter. I apologize for sounding conservative. I feel dirty... so very very dirty.

The actual PATRIOT ACT has way more in common with the Nazis than the Ex-Patriot Act.

brantgoose: Sounds a bit like the burning of the Reichstag to me.

Indeed it does.

My question is how are they going to determine the difference between legitimate business and political or tax reasons?

sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: Shoot, you win. Changing my name to Джаред and I just made an appointment to get fitted for a full Cossack outfit.

С Днем Рождения меня!

FuturePastNow: Don't forget Poland. They win the award for "highest percentage of population killed during WWII" at ~16.5%. Invaded by both sides. Ouch.

Actually if you break it down by Soviet Republic, 25% of Belarus was killed. And 60% of Jews. I should add that I am a Belarusian Jew.

Well, I'm glad at lest some of your ancestors made it. That wasn't a good time to be a Jew anywhere in Europe, but especially not in the Eastern half.

And since this is getting off-topic, I'll return to the subject at hand:

Grover Norquist is a shiatstain on the underwear of American politics.

Serious Black: tenpoundsofcheese: Lord_Baull: Leave it to the Republicans to equate renouncing your citizenship and leaving the country with patriotism and the American Way.

yeah, the idea of freedom is just so non-American.

leave it to the dems to continue with their thought crimes legislation attempts (you get the exit tax if your reason for leaving was based on taxes).

Dude, even John Boehner thinks what Saverin did was deplorable. Is he a RINO now?

No. Boehner is allowed to have a stupid opinion without being a RINO.

Jackson Herring: That was an attack, not a defense

You should consider shifting your views to the right where such nonsense would be more appreciated.

Forcing people to pay steep taxes to leave the country is a bad precedent.

Philip Francis Queeg: If the "Freedom to leave" is a core part of your political philosophy, wouldn't belief in the "Freedom to enter" be a necessary consequence?

Sure, as long as people do so through appropriate legal channels.

Pillar of Communism #4:

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels

Fart_Machine: Yup first you start with Interstate Highways and move to socialized medicine and soon they're setting up Concentration Camps and giving out free tattoos. It's the natural progression of things.

Who gets your vote? Candidate A or Candidate B?

Candidate A is a well-known critic of government, this man has been involved in tax protest movements, and has openly advocated secession, armed rebellion against the existing national government, and even the overthrow of that government. He is a known member of a militia group that was involved in a shoot-out with law enforcement authorities. He opposes gun control efforts of the present national government, as well as restrictions on open immigration into this country. He is a businessman who has earned his fortune from such businesses as alcohol, tobacco, retailing, and smuggling.

Candidate B is a decorated army war veteran, this man is an avowed nonsmoker and dedicated public health advocate. His public health interests include the fostering of medical research and his dedication to eliminating cancer. He opposes the use of animals in conducting such research. He has supported restrictions on the use of asbestos, pesticides, and radiation, and favors government-determined occupational health and safety standards, as well as the promotion of such foods as whole-grain bread and soybeans. He is an advocate of government gun-control measures. An ardent opponent of tobacco, he has supported increased restrictions on both the use of and advertising for tobacco products. Such advertising restrictions include: not allowing tobacco use to be portrayed as harmless or a sign of masculinity, not allowing such advertising to be directed to women, not drawing attention to the low nicotine content of tobacco products, and limitations as to where such advertisements may be made. This man is a champion of environmental and conservationist programs, and believes in the importance of military intervention into foreign countries to maintain order.

Splinshints:

and I hope Saverin falls astray of some minor law in Singapore and get a nasty caning.... dickhead

No one gets caned in Singapore that doesn't deserve it. And since Saverin has way too much money, it's highly doubtful he'd ever find himself on the wrong side of anything other than maybe a parking ticket. (He's an extremely nice person, btw; i am willing to bet that I am one of the few people in this thread who has actually met the man)

Summercat: Didn't Saverin move to Singapore in '09?>

Yes.

Deneb81: Summercat: Didn't Saverin move to Singapore in '09?>

Sometime just after mid-January?

No. He renounced his US citizenship last fall (September). He's been in Singapore full time for several years now. While I'm sure Saverin knew that Facebook would go public eventually, I doubt he knew actual dates last fall when he actually surrendered his passport, other than a "maybe in 2012 sometime". The only reason this is close to news is lazy reporters trying to dig up some kind of Facebook/Social Network connection that is understandable to people, because no one in the general public seems to know any names of FB founders other than Zuckerberg.

He also had to pay capital gains on fair-market value on his Facebook shares already during the process of expatriation. It's not like he escaped scot-free by any means, but don't let that stop you all from a good rant. Oh, and from lil Chuckie Schumer from making an asshole of himself. By this point it's his middle name: Charles Asshole Schumer.

Summercat: devlin carnate: Splinshints:

You're a bit... late.

sorry my schedule didn't synch with yours. no, really - i'm sorry. i will ask for your permission next time. my long weekend was at the beginning of the month for May Day and Vesak Day.

and since what i answered were unanswered questions, i figured better late than never.

did you find this post by searching for your own name?