Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hector13]

Yes.

Mostly because you’ll be dead from being unable to afford anything.

Also, Josh is a tax rookie. That’s what you call a first year pro.

[Frumple]

It's around there, yeah, though I can't confirm offhand the exact amount. If you're under a certain yearly income you don't even have to file.

It was the sole and only aid florida gave me when I lost health insurance due to blue cross being fuckers in response to the ACA; I was poor enough I didn't have to file, so the tax related burden for not having insurance just wasn't applicable.

[JoshuaFH]

if you made less than 12,950 of taxable income, then you don't even have to file taxes

Is this actually true???

Well, for the most part, yes. However, for every tax law, there's 10+ exceptions. The 12,950 is for the single filing status. For married couples, it's actually 25,900. If you or your spouse happen to be over the age of 65, then it's even higher. If you happen to be a dependent, then there's a slew of other qualification that determine if you have to file.

If you happen to be Married Filing separately, then the requirement to file is only 5 dollars of earned income.

There's also other things that can require you to file a tax return. I defer to the IRS 501 publication on the subject: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p501.pdf

[lemon10]

There was a little bit of a communication disconnect from Spin's tone and word choice compared to what he actually meant to say I think.

Spin brought up the waste of shipping it around, and that's also a good point.

Actually its not necessarily a good point.
The reason for this is that boats are really big, can carry a lot of stuff, and they can float.
Like so big and so much stuff that thanks to economies of scale shipping stuff many thousands of miles is actually pretty damn cheap. In many circumstances it can even be cheaper then moving stuff within the same state.

Spoiler: Big Picture breaking down greenhouse emissions from food (click to show/hide)

That isn't to say global shipping doesn't add to the environmental cost, but (especially with meats) food choice plays a way bigger role then shipping distance.

[Max™]

Can I just say it is HI-LAR-I-OUS that dude goes "hey whoa, I don't even eat meat, slow your roll on lumping me in with fascists" as though a certain especially famous nazi wasn't a goddamn vegetarian? I mean, are you doing a bit? I'd say bravo on your commitment if it wasn't so cringey. If someone spends so much time trying to explain why "akshually" this or that isn't fashy or defending hypothetical nazis... I'd say I hate to break it to them that they're probably a nazi, but they already know, and feigning ignorance while pushing the bounds of discussion is literally page 1 of the handbook.

Look the important thing here and the thing which leads me to judge people in a snap these days is, well, remember years ago when I was trying to get folks to freak out over all these fucking nazis?

Now I see people discussing "the trans issues" as though it is fucking normal for people who:

a. aren't trans
b. don't have trans partners/loved ones
c. have no clue what the hell they're talking about

Which looks awfully fucking ominous now that the fucking nazis are blatant enough OTHER people are noticing it, and now we've got ordinary people talking about a vulnerable group?

Huh, sounds familiar, remember oh about 90 goddamn years ago when fucking nazis were starting to operate openly and getting ordinary people talking about "the jewish issues" before a bunch of awful fucking shit happened?

You don't engage nazis in the "marketplace of ideas" and you don't help anyone by agreeing to engage them on their terms WHEN THEY'RE CLEARLY SETTING UP TO START A FUCKING GENOCIDE AGAIN, FUCK!

Why is this not freaking more of you out?

Like I get the trans folks freaking out, but those of you who AREN'T trans and are just casually discussing this shit as opposed to why we aren't hunting down nazis? What the fuck?



As for taxes: the IRS already knows exactly how much you paid and might owe and in LITERALLY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY ON THE PLANET they've demonstrated the ability for THEIR government to send out forms which people can check over easily and sign and return.

This is just American Exceptionalism all over again, the only place where [stupid shit happens] can't understand why [stupid shit it allows/enforces/enables] keeps happening.

[nenjin]

However the simple fact of the matter is that heavily processed foods typically have a ton more added sugar/salt in them even if you ignore the stuff (*cough* forever chemicals *cough*) that should never be in food in the first place and that other stuff that probably isn't quite safe but also isn't outlawed yet by the weak FDA.

I'd distinguish between "processed foods" as something that happens to all foods we don't personally grow and process ourselves, and "food additives." Food additives are the major source of problems, I agree. Like I just learned tons of shit contains Titanium Dioxide because it makes food look better. Banned in the EU, legal here.

The cause of the problem is that the FDA's mandate is split between ensuring the food we eat is safe, and ensuring that producers can get their products to market in good order. Which means little to no longitudinal studies on the effects of food additives because producers "can't" wait that long for approval on their new way to make their food more appealing and/or addictive.

So yeah. All food is processed. Food being processed itself isn't a bad thing. It's what gets added during processing that is what actually matters. On that I don't disagree.

But back to the original point of "if it's in a pill it's bad", it's still not a good take.

[Maximum Spin]

But back to the original point of "if it's in a pill it's bad", it's still not a good take.

Exactly zero people said that.

Christ.

passim

are you a right-wing parody account

"I try to eat healthy—"
"ALL THESE FUCKING RIGHT-WING STEAK-EATERS ARE NAZIS"
"actually I don't even eat meat—"
"SO YOU'RE JUST LIKE HITLER??! YOU VEGETARIAN PALEO-DIETING NAZIS SHOULD BE HUNTED DOWN!"

It was a cute performance I guess.

[nenjin]

But back to the original point of "if it's in a pill it's bad", it's still not a good take.

Exactly zero people said that.

I mean, I don't think taking any kind of pills can ever be called "normal", in that it's not part of the normal biology of a human body.

The only point is that, from any biological or historical or cross-cultural perspective, chewing on roots or tree bark is the normal way to deal with problems, and popping pills, much less getting stabbed with a needle, is profoundly weird and unique.

Any statement about effect has nothing to do with anything, because "normal" is a totally separate axis from "good" and equivocating between the two is insane and fallacious.

You really are playing both sides of the fence. "Ah well it's not normal but I wouldn't call that BAD. Oh but I don't take them and they're useless. But I'm not calling them BAD. Oh and it has an environmental cost but I didn't use the word BAD. It's not natural but I'm not saying that's BAD." You're splitting hairs to try and buttress the strong opinion you rolled out with that a lot of people obviously disagree with. We're not misunderstanding you.

[Maximum Spin]

You really are playing both sides of the fence. "Ah well it's not normal but I wouldn't call that BAD. Oh but I don't take them and they're useless. But I'm not calling them BAD. Oh and it has an environmental cost but I didn't use the word BAD." You're splitting hairs to try and buttress the strong opinion you rolled out with that a lot of people obviously disagree with. We're not misunderstanding you.

Hold on.

Oh but I don't take them and they're useless.

When did I say this? Chapter and verse? Be specific.

You've read my entire argument completely backward. I wasn't making a point about medicine, I was making the point that "abnormal" doesn't mean "bad". I used medicine as an example of something that is clearly abnormal by global, historical, and biological perspectives.
You're sitting here giving me shit about "I didn't use the word BAD, I'm not calling them BAD".
THAT WAS. MY FUCKING. POINT.

I'm not playing both sides of the fence, I'm clearly saying "don't equivocate between 'normal' and 'right'" and you are categorically refusing to stop equivocating between 'normal' and 'right'.

Oh, and about the "environmental cost", seriously, how did you all miss that I phrased the alternative as "chew on some grass and die anyway"? I put them both in negative terms to make the point that everything has tradeoffs and can be made to sound however you want depending on what you emphasize.

[Lord Shonus]

Like I just learned tons of shit contains Titanium Dioxide because it makes food look better. Banned in the EU, legal here.

Note that the EU ban (which went into effect last year) is almost entirely "well, we can't completely prove it isn't harmful", not "we have any real evidence to suggest it is". There's no epidemiological source suggesting that it has any hazardous effect whatsoever, and the fear is largely "well, some of the particles get really small, and we know very small particles of other chemicals can cause damage". It isn't quite as groundless as "Mountain Dew makes you sterile!!", but it isn't strongly supported by anything.

[lemon10]

You've read my entire argument completely backward. I wasn't making a point about medicine, I was making the point that "abnormal" doesn't mean "bad". I used medicine as an example of something that is clearly abnormal by global, historical, and biological perspectives.
You're sitting here giving me shit about "I didn't use the word BAD, I'm not calling them BAD".
THAT WAS. MY FUCKING. POINT.

I'm not playing both sides of the fence, I'm clearly saying "don't equivocate between 'normal' and 'right'" and you are categorically refusing to stop equivocating between 'normal' and 'right'.

Oh, and about the "environmental cost", seriously, how did you all miss that I phrased the alternative as "chew on some grass and die anyway"? I put them both in negative terms to make the point that everything has tradeoffs and can be made to sound however you want depending on what you emphasize.

If everyone misunderstands what you said in the exact same way it may be because you either weren't clear, or (in this case) you seemed to be clear enough but arguing for something else entirely.

Your most recent posts have been clear enough, but your previous ones were bad and confusing enough that people being angry/annoyed at you is on you.

Oh, and about the "environmental cost", seriously, how did you all miss that I phrased the alternative as "chew on some grass and die anyway"? I put them both in negative terms to make the point that everything has tradeoffs and can be made to sound however you want depending on what you emphasize.

You're just equivocating between "abnormal" and "there's something wrong with it". Pills that have to be manufactured in a factory halfway around the world and shipped to you at enormous energy expense are obviously abnormal, and qualitatively different from the prehistoric "eat some roots and grass and probably die anyway" correlate.

deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying.

The "chew some grass" thing being bad was very much not clear at all by the way you wrote the post, largely because the word abnormal=bad in many contexts, especially when juxtaposted with something normal.
Yes, your position seemed strange and stupid. That bizzare opinion you were presenting (but very much did not mean to present) is what got people annoyed at you.

[Maximum Spin]

If everyone misunderstands what you said in the exact same way it may be because you either weren't clear, or (in this case) you seemed to be clear enough but arguing for something else entirely.

"Everyone" didn't, though. After this argument started I ran everything I said by some people I know elsewhere, and got a 100% rate of understanding.

I'm more inclined to put my argument not making sense to "a few people in one particular place" down to cultural problems.

And you can keep repeating your insistence on "normal" having a connotation of "right", but that's just not consistent with my experience with an awful lot of people. If anything, when I'm talking to real people, "normal" usually comes up in the context of a bad thing that's "normal" so you just have to deal with it when it happens. Certainly, some people equivocate between the two, but it's not something you can safely assume, at least until you know what the speaker means.
I'm saying not to assume this, and you're just telling me that you want to assume this so it's my fault for not letting you assume it. Look, you can assume what you want but you're going to have problems like this if you do. Now, you can certainly say the same thing to me ­— although I don't seem to have that problem anywhere else — but I'd like to think that "not making assumptions" is a better null hypothesis than making them.

[Random_Dragon]

If you don't want to be known as "they guy who posts weird hot takes" maybe either A) tone down the weird hot takes a notch or B) don't constantly double down and start shit with people when it's pointed out to you.

[Maximum Spin]

If you don't want to be known as "they guy who posts weird hot takes" maybe either A) tone down the weird hot takes a notch or B) don't constantly double down and start shit with people when it's pointed out to you.

That's a particularly strange takeaway.

[Robsoie]

What a very odd circle jerk.
Maybe because i'm no english speaker there's something i'm missing, but "taking pills is not normal" in the context of the

I mean, I don't think taking any kind of pills can ever be called "normal", in that it's not part of the normal biology of a human body.

seems to mean that it's not -natural- as obviously pills are manufactured and not obtained in nature (like barks and roots are)

But i don't see a point in Maximum Spin posts in which he means pills are always bad, don't take them, go eat barks and roots and probably die from a lack of specific vitamin or die from a disease that modern medecin pills would have healed while nature would have let you die or killed you faster like in prehistory ?