The late 1970s was when the top tier tax rate fell below punitive levels. Unlike in the 1950s and 1960s (91% top-tier tax rate), there was more benefit to accepting the tax than spending the excess revenue on deductible expenses.

The tax policy used to drive the rich to spend their money rather than hoard it.

We need militias to arrest the anti-constitition traitors who are sending them.

AFAIK, when a law says something like “This section does not [do something]” It’s usually because some other law explicitly prohibits [something]. Without such language, the two laws could be seen as conflicting.

I think excluding girls from boys teams violates Title IX.

The law in question doesn’t actually mandate that school sports teams must be designated “based on the biological sex of the students who participate” in the sport. If you read the law, it only prohibits biological males from participating in female sports. It does not prohibit biological females from participating in male sports. Quite the contrary, it specifically acknowledges that all students, regardless of sex or gender, are allowed to participate in “boys” sports.

https://codes.findlaw.com/az/title-15-education/az-rev-st-sect-15-120-02/

The principal really needs to read the law. This school is so fucked.

https://codes.findlaw.com/az/title-15-education/az-rev-st-sect-15-120-02/

The law in question only prohibits biological males from participating in female sports. It does not prohibit females from joining boys teams. Compare and contrast sections “B” and “C”:

B. Athletic teams or sports designated for “females”, “women” or “girls” may not be open to students of the male sex.

C. This section does not restrict the eligibility of any student to participate in any interscholastic or intramural athletic team or sport designated as being for “males”, “men” or “boys” or designated as “coed” or “mixed”.

I also thought this was pretty interesting:

E. Any student who is deprived of an athletic opportunity or suffers any direct or indirect harm as a result of a school knowingly violating this section has a private cause of action for injunctive relief, damages and any other relief available under law against the school.

How is it enforced? A bounty system would work. 10% of any funds collected or forfeited.

No body will be executed. They’ll all figure out how to pry open their wallets and portfolios within the 90-day amnesty window.

No exceptions. It’s not hard to become less wealthy. The only allowance I’d offer is a warning 90 days in advance that continued retention of their obscene wealth will become a capital offense. They can unload their excess in that time frame and keep their heads.

Bullshit.

“Stocks” are “ownership of the means of production”.

You absolutely can feed yourself on your share of “the means of production”.

We gather the top 8 and tell them #9 is being promoted to #1, either through a wealth tax, or a head tax.

Repeat at least annually.

Nailed it.

What we need is a securities tax: a tax on every stock, bond, and other financial instruments in their portfolio. No need to liquidate it; the shares are simply transferred to the IRS annually. They’ll liquidate those shares slowly over time.

Natural persons are exempted on the first $10 million of their portfolio. No exemptions for artificial persons.

I agree with the sentiment, but it’s worth noting that the current excesses of CEO compensation through stock incentives

Securities tax, payable in shares of the security. 1% of all registered securities are transferred directly to the IRS each and every year. Natural persons can request an exemption for up to $10 million worth. No exemption for corporate or other artificial “persons”.

IRS liquidators will auction the taxed shares over time, such that sale of taxed shares are never more than 1% of total traded volume.

Government is also the entity that will be prosecuting/persecuting you when they don’t like what you have to say.

deleted by creator

How about we just stay as far away from traffic as possible.

Obstructing freedom of movement really pisses off the general public, and drives them to seek authoritarian solutions.

Nothing turns people from “All Cops Are Bastards” to “Back The Blue” faster than cops driving through protest barricades.

Stay away from traffic.

“Farmer” has come to mean the corporate owner of fields in which crops are grown, rather than the people waking up at the ass crack of dawn to tend to the fields and bring in the harvest.

“Farm workers” are now the ones doing all the labor.

What they are doing is asking all unions to set May 1st 2028 as the expiration date for their next labor contract. They aren’t actually scheduling a strike, just laying the groundwork.

Not with that attitude.

Be the change you want to see in the world.

ISPs like to offer, say $65 for service (without committing to a specific speed… Their 100/100 service is “up to 100Mbps” and not a guarantee.)

They then want to charge a modem rental fee - another $5/mo. They want to charge a wifi access point rental fee - another $5/mo. They want to charge various regulatory fees, universal access fees, taxes, etc. They want their advertisements to say “$65/mo”, but they want to collect more like $90/mo.

You can buy your own modem and save that $5/mo (but they often push back against that, claiming your modem isn’t compatible, or that other customers have complained about inferior service with that modem). You can use your own wifi AP and save that $5/mo (but again, they discourage it…) You can’t get away from the regulatory fees.

If I put federal law enforcement and National Guard into a nice sleepy Southern town, is anyone gonna riot?”

Probably, yes.

The only thing the good ol’ boys hate more than them “liberal queers” is the federal government sticking its nose in their business.

Ask Cliven Bundy if he’ll put up with the National Guard in his “sleepy” town.

The more complex answer is that the stock market at this point is just a speculative mess where numbers are made up because the price isn’t dictated by what the company is currently capable of doing but rather what the company potentially could be doing in thue future.

You seem to be under the impression it was ever anything else.