Source olgaf (very NSFW sex/commedy comics)

  • solstice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think you’re the one who got hit on the head with a brick if you think that’s a good analogy!

    This Reddit thread is a great recent example among countless: https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/16aoen5/calls_to_tax_the_superrich_grow_as_economic/

    I agree in principle but all the comments in there demonstrate lack of fundamental understanding of all things business/accounting/tax related. We cross post comments from these threads over to r/accounting and tax all the time to laugh at morons who don’t know what they’re talking about.

    It’s a good idea to not go around vehemently talking shit expressing strong opinions about technical subjects you know nothing about. I don’t know why this is a controversial subject but here we are.

    • Primarily0617@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Are you saying the science of skull structure isn’t a highly technical subject? Sounds like you don’t get to have an opinion on whether taking one to the face is a good thing or not.

      versus

      Are you saying the US tax code isn’t a highly technical subject? Sounds like you don’t get to have an opinion on whether tax cuts incentivize a behavior or not.

      It works as an analogy because the below is exactly as clever a thing to say as the above.

      • solstice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Phrenology is a known pseudoscience debunked by plenty of people smarter than me. I don’t need to have an opinion on it because I can and do reasonably rely on the opinions of the experts who debunked it.

        The better analogy would be if I sat here arguing FOR phrenology, when I’m not an expert in it, against a neurologist who is presumably far more qualified.

        This is a really simple concept and it is dismaying that you still don’t understand.

        • Primarily0617@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just so I’m clear, your position is that tax deductions for a behavior don’t incentivize that behavior? Making an entity pay less money to do a thing doesn’t make them more likely to do that thing? That’s your position?

          • solstice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just answer the damn question, what do you want?? And remember this is all in response to my initial sarcastic comment that this cartoon will lead to level headed reasonable discussion about tax.

            The top level comment put it well: this comic is about propaganda not taxes.

            • Primarily0617@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              what do you want??

              Literally even the slightest hint that you’re against lobbying in education that results in corporate propaganda being fed to children.

              Unfortunately, seeing no issue with tax incentives for that exact thing is a mutually exclusive position to hold.