To be fair to Marjorie Taylor Green (and her comments on "HIPAA"), the left-wing can be equally obtuse when it suits them. A good example is the tweet below. As far as anybody can tell, Bezos and Musk pay all their income taxes.
I mention this because of stories like this from ProPublica that deliberately twist the data to make people believe these guys aren't paying their fair share of income taxes.
propublica.org/article/the-se…
The ProPublica piece just exploits peoples ignorance of tax law, lack of common sense, and political bias in order to drive readership, but fails at rationality, just like Marjorie Taylor Green's views of HIPAA and Section 230.
How did Bezos' wealth increase by $3.8 billion in 2007 while he paid no income taxes? It's because he earned no income. The value of your assets increasing isn't income -- it's only income when you sell those assets. Image
Housing prices have shot up during the pandemic, with lots of people in $300,000 that are suddenly now worth $600,000. Imagine if they had to pay income taxes on the increase. With 15% long term capital gains, they'd suddenly be hit with a $45,000 tax bill.
So they have the sell their home to pay the $45,000, and lose another $30,000 on top of that because of realtor commissions, and then since all other home prices have gone up, can only afford a home less desirable than the one they had before.
This is why no country on Earth taxes people on the growth of their assets as ProPublica claims they should. Governments don't care when they tax people on the growth net worth, because they know they'll get the taxes eventually when it's sold creating income.
All the growth in Bezos's net worth will get taxed eventually, when he sells it. It's stupid to assume that growth in 2007 needs to be paid as income tax in 2007. This is especially true when he has no income with which to pay those taxes.
Most people have steady income and few savings. And they hate billionaires. So they work backwards to create some non-existent standard of how taxes should work, rather than how they actually work, in order to hate billionaires.
Same with Marjorie Taylor Green, an extraordinarily ignorant person who works backwards from how she thinks the world should work (in her favor) into a standard of how HIPAA and Section 230 actually work.
To be clear, as far as all the data shows, including ProPublica's leaked IRS info, billionaires are paying their full share of income taxes. Dan Rather lives disagrees, but he lives in the same world as Marjorie Taylor Green.
Bezos sold stock in Amazon (just not in 2007, obviously) to invest in Blue Origin. That means he paid income taxes on all the money that he spent on his space flight. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Robᵉʳᵗ Graham😷, provocateur

Robᵉʳᵗ Graham😷, provocateur Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ErrataRob

21 Jul
Because I'm an idiot, I'm writing my own static analyzer for C. I'm kinda stuck at the C preprocessing stage, because it's really poorly defined, so I'm on my third rewrite of that part trying to get things to work.
The history of the C preprocessor is this:

The C language is designed according to nice abstract theories of languages and LALR grammars.

The C preprocessor is an ugly hack dropped like a turd on tope of that.
On the other hand, I wrote my own Regex library for tokenization (the step before preprocessing). That went really well -- I finally understand things about Regexx that have long been a mystery.
Read 5 tweets
21 Jul
Your regular reminder that few on the Twitters follow CDC advice and "listen without judgement and identify the root of their concerns".
Note that they'll never appear to agree with you. They'll keep bringing up new objections, some of which they got from crazy conspiracy theorists. It'll be frustrating for you.

You won't see how weeks later they just go out and get vaccinated.
"The vaccine is in your own (and kids) best interest" is a winning argument, clearly supported by the evidence.

"What you want doesn't matter, get vaccinated for the common good, asshole" is a losing argument.
Read 4 tweets
21 Jul
In such cases, it's probable that the researchers got a bunch of things wrong. Which puts NSO in a bad position: they can't point out the actual errors without confirming that the rest of the stuff is true.
Whether or not their analysis is correct, Amnesty International has done a phenomenal job in transparency:
amnesty.org/en/latest/rese…
But normally, I'm on the side of media targets like the NSO. The problem is that the media makes no effort in actually being fair here. Even if NSO were to make arguments defending itself, the media wouldn't care. Their efforts to get NSO's point-of-view is perfunctory.
Read 4 tweets
21 Jul
Here's my risk analysis for DEFCON hacker conference on August 5.

tl;dr: I'm not changing travel plans, but instead changing plans of what I'll do in Vegas. Namely, spend most of the time going out on hikes in the area.
The concern is the "Delta variant", which infects even some vaccinated people, though it doesn't seem to harm vaccinated people.

The numbers from the UK are predictive of what the United States is going to see in a month or two. Image
The UK has better vaccination rates than the United States. So the reason for the next wave of infections isn't because they don't vaccinate enough. Image
Read 8 tweets
21 Jul
This is a good example of the political bias of the media: Paul's accusations may be wrong, but they are clearly "substantiated". That was the entire point of the exchange, forcing Fauci to respond directly to well-substantiated facts. thehill.com/policy/healthc… Image
Rand Paul may still be wrong. That isn't the issue here. The issue is substantiation. In the hearing, Rand Paul clearly substantiated his claims, citing this specific study:
journals.plos.org/plospathogens/…
Rand Paul claims the paper including the specific NIH grant number where they got their funding, which is NIAID R01AI110964.
reporter.nih.gov/project-detail… Image
Read 11 tweets
18 Jul
Time for my Sunday long tweet stream rant. I apologize in advance.
The term #covidiots is trending. It's a great example of social-media toxicity that polarizes society.

"Facts, data, science, reason" are not on your side if you don't use them. And I don't see people use them on social-media.

Take "unknown long term effects". How would you answer this concern using "facts, data, science, reason"?

You actually can, which I'll do here in the following tweets.

Read 19 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(