atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#5342: The world is in flux, and I can't even get my grass cut.

I may try to rectify that today, though.

* * *

So, someone leaked a tax return of Trump's that's old enough to buy beer, and somehow it proves that Trump's not paying taxes. As if that disqualified him from being President.

Denninger explains why it's not wrong or evil but anyone with sense doesn't need the complex explanation to understand why Hillary Clinton and the Democrats are full of shit when they claim Trump isn't paying taxes. (Hint: their mouths are open.)

Trump took nearly a billion dollars' worth of actual capital loss in 1995--meaning that his own personal net worth declined by that much--and according to the black-letter tax law he is able to write down future tax liability by about three thousand dollars per year. In effect it's giving him an extra deduction, one that's miniscule for someone with such a large income.

And to Democrats, that deduction equals "not paying any taxes". By that standard, we can say that Hillary also is not paying any taxes, because she makes incestuous "charitable contributions" to her own husband's "foundation" which reduces her tax liability.

Another take on the story.

Where this all falls down, though, is the unavoidable fact that Trump is obeying the law. No one is alleging that he's broken the law, because they can't, because that would be defamation or libel or slander or WTF-ever. The Democrats are having to point this finger of blame at Trump and are desperately trying to paint this minor legal deduction as some kind of immoral act, when most Americans already regard the IRS as an enormous pain in the ass.

I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and figure that people are going to shrug at this and say, "Well, if he's obeying the law, and they don't like it, shouldn't they change the law?" And a certain sector of the voting public (self included) will think the fact that he's smart enough to avoid paying taxes is a mark in his favor, rather than a mark against. It shows that he knows how to hire good advisors.

And the fact that they're harping on the tax issue tells me that the "dangerous racist nazi" nonsense isn't getting enough traction. Except with committed Democrat voters, which is preaching to the choir.

I'll admit that I was uncritical of Hillary's line that Trump doesn't pay any federal taxes. I liked the idea too much--that someone could make money like Trump and be smart enough not to pay federal taxes, legally--to question it. But the reality (as outlined by Denninger, above) is much closer to my expectations of how the tax code works. I'm a little disappointed that Trump is taking a deduction, rather than actually not paying any taxes. It was a nice story while it lasted.


What a big fuckin' surprise THIS is. Hillary has used exactly the same deduction that Trump used. So by the standard she herself has employed thus far, HILLARY CLINTON IS NOT PAYING FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.

I'd make a comment here about the hypocrisy, but Democrats are hypocritical three times before breakfast and that'd be commenting on a "dog bites man" story. Redundant.


* * *

Rich idiots building bunkers, preparing for a disaster with swimming pools, bowling alleys, hydroponic gardens, and garages full of luxury cars.
If the people that are building these bunkers were able to think about what they were doing, they would have known enough to leave the “Sons of Martha” types alone. Their malignant narcissism wouldn’t let them do that. If everything did not revolve around them, they were compelled to destroy it. Since they were incapable of building anything, as far as they were concerned, nobody else should either. In places like California, New York and Connecticut by and large these people have made it impossible for anybody to build or fix the things needed to maintain the society in which we all live. Seemingly just out a petty narrow need to prove their own self importance.
(Ref. The Sons of Martha by Kipling.)

The people who think they'll ride out an extended dislocation, or an interregnum, in pampered luxury are fooling themselves. That shelter is good for a couple of weeks, maybe. Anything longer?

Well, if you read Lucifer's Hammer you'll see what happens when things get really bad. Example: Tim Hamner, millionaire playboy, lights out for his observatory in the hills after the comet hits, only to find that the guy he hired to be his caretaker there has decided the place is his, and has guns (and friends with guns) to back him up, leaving Tim out in the armageddon.

So, you have a bunker like this, and the world ends, so (as planned) you have your above-ground gardener and chef and maid and chauffeur-mechanic come into the bunker with you and your family. How long before the servants become masters? When they realize that your money is no longer any good but the bunker itself is invaluable for survival? Can you be more ruthless than your former servant who is now telling you--at gunpoint, using one of your guns from the gun range--that either you leave or he'll shoot your daughter, then your wife, then you?

So for proper security you have to maintain everything yourself, so it's just you and your family in the bunker. Make sure you get there before your staff does; otherwise, see above.

* * *

British TV is going to get really, really bad. I lost interest in Doctor Who about the time Matt Smith became the Doctor, and Amy Pond showed up. I like Karen Gillan but I couldn't stand the character, and the last scene I watched in that show was the one where Amy Pond was trying to drag the Doctor into bed.

Apparently, judging by the comments at that thread, I stopped watching just in time.

Related: People related to Star Trek sign letter exhorting people to vote for Hillary Clinton. In some cases "related" is an overstatement; for example, what did Leonard Nimoy's kids have to do with ST, other than having their lives elevated to the heights of luxury by their father's fame?

And this made me chuckle:
David Gerrold

Ha! Ha! Ha! (*gasp...gasp*) Holy fuck David, do you have any idea how sad you look for riding on that one script from fifty years ago? You haven't had a real career in decades David. At this point you are little more than a fanzine contributor.
David Gerrold gave us "The Trouble With Tribbles", which is admittedly a well-written, fun ep of TOS, widely regarded as one of the best eps.

It's also one script using a story he borrowed from Heinlein. (The Rolling Stones, the chapters about the martian flat cats.) I have read one novel by Gerrold, The Man Who Folded Himself, about a guy with a magic time-traveling belt which let him have gay orgies with himself until he died. And which was, strangely enough, another Heinlein retread, this time using the premise of Heinlein's short story "By His Bootstraps".

And having seen "Tribbles" recently, I realize that while it's entertaining, I don't need to see it very often. I recorded it to the DVR but I don't think I'll keep it much longer; only until I decide whether or not it's worth dumping to a DVD.

The other characters--I see names I recognize on that list, people whose names I have not seen since their shows went off the air.

Well, anyway, I expect leftism from Hollywood the way I expect bad smells from the cat box. They can't help it. I already don't pay anything specifically to watch Star Trek; we have cable TV here and I may watch it if I have the time. I haven't bought a Trek book or movie or anything in decades, and have no need to. You can't call it a boycott when you already aren't spending any money on it; but what this does is to further my disinterest in all things Trek.

* * *

Anyway, that's today's post. I need to get some chores done.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.