Posts by Destroy All Monsters

One may recall that Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) lived in a time in which there was no income tax in the first place.

So one should not trot him out with a statement that today has quite a bit a different meaning. Yeah I know, progressive thinking demands that tax slavery be regarded as more freedom, but it's a slightly revolting thought at best.

The Origin of the Income Tax

The first proposal to impose an income tax on America occurred during the War of 1812. After two years of war, the federal government had accumulated a then-staggering $100 million of debt. To fund the war against Britain, the government doubled the rates of its major source of revenue, customs duties on imports, which obstructed trade and ended up yielding less revenue than the previous lower rates. At the height of the war, excise taxes were imposed on goods and commodities, and housing, slaves and land were taxed. After the war ended in 1816, these taxes were repealed and instead a high tariff was passed to retire the accumulated war debt. Thankfully, the notion of an income tax was defeated.

In July 1861, the Congress passed a 3% tax on all net income above $600 a year (about $10,000 today). However, no revenue was ever raised because a second tax passed before the first was due (on June 30, 1862). The war's demand on resources made the earlier tax ineffective, and the sale of bonds could not keep up with the expenditures of the administration and the armies. In March, the Congress passed an income tax of 3% on annual incomes of $600 to $10,000 and 5% on incomes from $10,000 to $50,000 and threw in a small inheritance tax too. Lincoln signed the bill on July 1, 1862 to take effect a month later. The Union debt then stood at $505 million. This tax also included the first appearance of withholding and was applied to federal salaries and on interest and dividends.

A sad exercise in being late to the party

"Our findings show that, in this new world of ultrafast robot algorithms, the behaviour of the market undergoes a fundamental and abrupt transition to another world where conventional market theories no longer apply."

Yeah well, I wonder in what kind of world these guys live when they think that in the world of QE Infinity and 70 billion dollar per month fresh money injections "conventional market theories" should apply anywhere outside the confused mind of NYT columnist Krugman.

The "machine wot done it" discussion is a rather old one. Here is Murray Rothbard on the crash of '87

Myth 3: The crash came about because of computer trading, which in association with stock index futures, has made the stock market more volatile. Therefore either computer trading or stock index futures or both, should be restricted/outlawed.

This is a variant of the scapegoat term "computer error" employed to get "people errors" off the hook. It is also a variant of the old Luddite fallacy of blaming modern technology for human error and taking a crowbar to wreck the new machines. People trade, and people program computers. Empirically, moreover, the "tape" was hours behind the action on Black Monday, and so computers played a minimal role. Stock index futures are an excellent new way for investors to hedge against stock price changes, and should be welcomed instead of fastened on--by its competitors in the old-line exchanges--to be tagged as the fall guy for the crash. Blaming futures or computer trading is like shooting the messenger--the markets that brings bad financial news. The acme of this reaction was the threat--and sometimes the reality--of forcibly shutting down the exchanges in a pitiful and futile attempt to hold back the news by destroying it. The Hong Kong exchange closed down for a week to try to stem the crash and, when it reopened, found that the ensuing crash was far worse as a result.

It wouldn't even matter if people were not forced to put their money into dubious stockmarket schemes just to "invest for their retirement", i.e. run the decidedly nonzero risk of being robbed blind by "investment" sharks while trying to avoid being robbed blind by bureaucracy sharks. (More on this: How the Stock Market and Economy Really Work)

"This new Women in Computing gallery at TNMOC will promote positive role models for women and so encourage girls and women in critical thinking and engineering. It shows the heroines of computing as historic facts to inspire the upcoming generation."

It is my sad understanding that these days, the above is already tl;dr for "girls".

I wish it were otherwise.

Literary reference FAIL

SInce when are there "brainwashed zombies" in 1984?

Maybe there are in the Americanized Version? With a good-looking Winston Smith cleaning up the Inner Circle?

"You killed my girfriend Brother - Big Mistake!"

"He did his job and all he got was pneumonia on a watchtower at Auschwitz"

"Our intelligence community would not be doing its job if we did not try to counter that"

Who gave you that job?

Who defined that job? Did you define that job yourself?

What is it for?

Where is the job description?

Does your paymaster know about you doing this job for him?

Does he approve of being the object of this job?

Is the job worth anything or is it just an ego trip and funride that yields nothing? Evidence says so.

Do you think your job is ethically a bit problematic? If not, why not?

Who pays for your job? Is it future generations? If so, are they okay with that?

Do you truthfully report to your supervisor (not the coloured decider cretin , i mean the "representatives")? If not, why not?

Is your supervisor in full control of his mental faculties? If not, why do you assume you are doing your job correctly?

Do you think your job is putting the nation on a path of hegemonistic ideological control? If not, why not?

Does your head rest uneasily?

What is conscience?

etc. etc.

A-ha!

Either the lair of Godzilla or the position of Second Impact.