221–230 of 304 posts
The US is such a stressful country, tax filing, healthcare, none of these basic things just work. Add to that the lawyers culture and you get a good basis for emotion filled Netflix dramas, but not really for real life.
I'll just mention https://freetaxusa.com at this point. I think about 100 commenters mentioned it over the years before I finally switched to it and I haven't looked back. It's a great product and way cheaper and way easier than TurboTax.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is so important and I think a lot of people miss it. The "left" that has power in the US (establishment dems) barely qualify as being left at all. They are very much invested in protecting power and wealth. The only "left" that would push against the rentiers are people who will almost never see power. However, I wouldnt say AOC winning is a "fluke". Its definitely the exception, but progressives have been able…
> The "left" that has power in the US (establishment dems) barely qualify as being left at all So when the left does something you dont like, they must not be left? Smells of no true scottsman to me.
The "No True Scottsman" statement must be used as the argument. It has to say that they're wrong BECAUSE they are not a true Scottsman.
What OP did was say there is The Left and there is "The Left". The Left is against rentiers. "The Left" supports rentiers. He's dividing the two, but he's not saying one is wrong because they're not true leftists, he's saying one is wrong because they support rentiers.
But then he additionally says they're not true leftists, which is to say that a leftists shouldn't support them because they don't align, which is where the smell comes from.
The main argument is not a Scottsman fallacy. But there's definitely some implied Scottsmanism in the additional use of Left and "Left", which if read by the right person who is already weak to Scottsmanism will materialize as the Scottsman fallacy.
EDIT: I thought you were wrong, but under more analysis, I realized you were right, it was just complicated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realized you just dismissed GDP per capita, a quantitative metric, as too “flawed”, then instead relied on HDI which entirely a made up metric based on subjective measures?
In the very least you'd have to adjust for purchasing power parity and look at the median rather than the mean, to say anything useful about quality of life for normal people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also why I was disappointed when Intuit bought Credit Karma. I will never use Turbo Tax, just out of principle. I cannot support a company like that.
FYI the DOJ wouldn't let Intuit buy the tax preparation part of Credit Karma, so that service is owned by Square now.
I had never used Credit Karma’s tax service anyway, but good to know.
I’ll take option 2, thank you!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alabama has a higher GDP per capita than Germany, Belgium, Israel, France, Japan, the U.K. and...I could go on. Alabama is doing well. We live in such an enormously wealthy country that it only looks bad by comparison. But not by comparison to basically anywhere else on Earth. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_between_U.S._states...
GDP is, unfortunately, a flawed metric. Or at least an incomplete one. I greatly doubt the average German, Belgian, Japanese, etc. would want to live in Alabama :-) Edit: Another flawed metric, but probably closer to the truth, tells a slightly different story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ... Alabama has roughly the same HDI as Cyprus. Cyprus is a nice place, but it's quite a bit behin…
Not a great comment, but I misread the title and was really interested in what the Inuit people had against easier taxes. Edit: I love how this is getting downvoted really fast. I feel like everyone is skimming and misunderstanding what I said :D