PK htiw klaw eriF

No one mentioned equal outcome regardless of labor put in. I understand that's an easier argument to address, but we're talking about something else here. As to your examples of rags to riches, good on them. However when the majoroty of cases are rags to rags and riches to riches, those inspiring examples won't do much for a guy whose father worked 40 hours a week to end up living in poverty and him on the same track.

On the other hand when you factor out government subsidies about half the population is under the poverty line, I'll take some liberty and assume that they are generally correlated with those paying a net 0 or less income tax. Perhaps increasing their tax burden through a flat tax without deductions would make them hate those in that 10% (or .1% if we want to be very accurate) and push for polices even more punitive than what we have now. I mean try telling a guy who can barely pay his bills when he and his wife work a combined 80 hours a week they need to suck it up for a well off guy with and big house and decent cars to get a break and I doubt you'll have a warm reception.

I think the question is how will Beamdog manage to make NWN worse?

A flat tax ends up being regressive based upon how spending and wealth accumulation actually works. So much for the tolerant mods. Fake news, Trump is playing 3d chess betacucks can't comprehend.

If anything a flat tax on income would exacerbate the issues of wealth concentration and poverty. Going back to the idealistic graphs in the irrefutable science of basic economics, the lines for income and spending have different slopes and starting points. A 15% tax on income would make it harder on those whoze income is under around the spending level while benfitting who are way above it with more capital to invest. I mean I guess it's a good idea if you're a radical leftist accelerationist who thinks the working class won't revolt until things get bad, but otherwise I can't see why anyone would think this is a good idea.

Getting a tattoo that's paid in Tic Tacs.seems to me like a risky proposition. Wasn't the 85% number applicable only above 1 million bucks? What's wrong with that? Milllionaires would end up homeless apparently.

Did the massive Stalinist network finally get to him? Quoting someone is a strawman.

Teachers need to have skin in the game so they know how hard it is to be a milllionaire.

So you support throwing families to streets because Grandpa who owned the house died. How German of you. Quoting someone is now making stuff up. r00fles

Well they did start with taxation. Learn history of your people Nazi! I guess Nazism really does date back to the Roman Empire and those occultists were right about being from Atlantis. I find it funny that they'd tell a guy who wound up on the street because he lost his job to pull himself up by his bootstraps but millionaires should be coddled or else they'll end up homeless.

I think the jews slaughtered by the Nazis would have much preferred the evil of getting taxed on inheritence over $1 million than a gas chamber.

He's absolutely right, if you don't start out with over a million you've essentially been thrown out on the street. If you don't have cash for paying the tax for inherited property which is the house you live in, then you go out on the street. Socialism 101. If you don't the wealth to aford to live in an over $1mil home with inheritance, then you're going to sell the property regardless of inheritance tax. It seems you're in need of something a little simpler than 101.

He's absolutely right, if you don't start out with over a million you've essentially been thrown out on the street.

Michael Fassbender would be my personal favorite from that generation, and Tom Hardy is up there for certain as well. Some actors who come to mind that I think are as good or better, or at least worthy of consideration (all within five years of Gosling's age): Michael Fassbender Tom Hardy Chiwetel Ejiofor Tahar Rahim Oscar Isaac Jake Gyllenhaal Reported for neglecting Cillian Murphy.

****.

I am doing nothing and somehow I've got As. You can too if you embrace nihilistic hedonism.

What is so hard to understand about the fact that jobs demand is strongly inelastic? You cannot survive without income, and if you have no capital, you cannot have an income without work. So you're not "free" to choose whether to sell your labor or not. You must sell it, at whatever price the market is willing to pay for it. Or live off the grid. You only MUST sell and pay the price IF your wanting what they are selling. Don't wanna pay for power? Go off grid and adapt to not using power. Want to pay for your toys? Get a job or realize you don't NEED those toys. Want food? Grow ur own and hunt, trade for food. You don't HAVE to sell yourself at all, your perfectly capable of living without doing so. BUT if u want things that u did not make nor have the knowledge of making, then don't bitch when u gotta sell ur soul and time for modern COMFORTS. The vast majority of people could not live off grid, even if discounting skills or equipment needed because there is simply not enough public land to do so. Sure going off grid and living like a woodsman would be nice, but if you get thrown off where you try to settle it's not a viable option. So to realistically live off grid as you suggest, you have to labor enough to afford to purchase property, which brings us back to the numbersman's point that if you do not own capital you have to work or you will starve. This is indisputable, which brings us to the issue of choice. The choice is ultimately an illusion because of economies of scale. As hinted by our elite friend, demand for jobs is inelastic which means as much as I wish I could land a sweet union gig in manufacturing there's a limited amount of them. I can not wish myself a position there by choice, so to eat I must seek work elsewhere and go down the ladder to whatever I end up on. If it ends in a job I can always quit, but then it's back down the ladder to a likely worse job or unemployment. Now while in this job I have the choice of learning new skills which simply lands me on a better ladder assuming the skills I learned weren't learned en masse and my competition is largely the same, in which case I blew a lot of money and time for nothing. The other choice is to work for years, take out some loans, and start my own business, which if it works is great(technically it did work for me), but in the likely event it doesn't work I'm out a good amount of money and back on the old employment ladder. Last I looked about 96% of businesses fail within 10 years, and while a 4% success rate is fine and dandy to some I'd call a situation where failure is 24x more likely than success to be regarded with some suspicion. If this is truly the best of all systems that have been tried, than something new should be tried.

Masculinity depends on the context of culture and time, if John Wayne were to imported from his prime he'd be called a skinnyfat and told to do starting strength. It could absolutely be toxic, just consoder the example of Wayne being a possible homosexual, such a thing is today considered feminine and would have been even worse back then. If this was the case, it would have caused Wayne a lot of grief. For a more modern example consider the toxic effect virginity has on men over 16, I challenge you to look at various incel forums or /r9k/ and then make an argument that failing to meet percieved standards of masculinity is not harmful.

The sad thing about Alien is how the sequels never match the horror. For all its extreme faults I enjoyed Prometheus much more than Aliens or Alien 3/4. Anyways I'm setting up a watch list for next week, so far got Pan's Labyrinth and TheWind that Shakes the Barley.

What is so hard to understand about the fact that jobs demand is strongly inelastic? It doesn't jive with ideology.

I'm struggling to think of five at the top of my head because I start focusing on what I dislike about them and how they could be better. Ideally there would be no all-time top 100 because there would be continuous improvement, which I'm not optimistic about tbh but there's some things I'm looking forward to. Did he win?

Like the character models, but wish eye color got a slider or something and hoping for a facial hair like the rough beard from New Vegas. Also think a lot of wizard buffs should be transmutation and not enchantment, was confused there. And multiclass levelups could use some work when you pick more than one class ability. Overall looks cool and can't wait to play more.

Can confirm.

Yeah, but you don't like anything. I can't help my refined taste.

I thought Fifth Element was dumb and not even David Bowie could save Labryinth.