Show Comments That Contain...
  • On 9 Jul 2014 in Paris to Tax Empty Offices at 20-40% of Rental Value; Price Crash On the Way, mell said:

    Bellingham Bill says

    Dan8267 says

    I predict economic prosperity by eliminating this waste. Let's run the experiment.

    LVT actually has a pretty good history where it has been implemented. People abandon it at their peril, LOL.

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?366312-The-Single-Tax-Land-Value-Tax-(LVT)

    Given the choice between the two, I'd favor a LVT over a progressive income tax anytime. And I like seeing it discussed seriously in the libertarian forums.

  • On 9 Jul 2014 in Rooftop Solar is making a serious dent on coal in Australia, mell said:

    bob2356 says

    It makes sense in oz where electricity is 3-4 times more expensive than the US. Unless there is a pv breakthrough it will be a while before it makes sense in the US.

    I am not for subsidizing. this leads to crappy companies sucking up the money like Solyndra, and it depends on the use case. Putting a Solar panel on a your roof (or even in your backyard if you live in the country) in a sunny and generally mild-weathered (no danger of damage) state like CA makes sense already and is gaining a lot of momentum.

  • On 9 Jul 2014 in Rooftop Solar is making a serious dent on coal in Australia, mell said:

    lostand confused says

    I wonder if anyone has installed solar on their homes and after the subsidy/credits, does it make a dent in bills? Is it economically feasible?

    I haven't, but I deem it viable and know people who have made good experiences with it. This is one of the things that is going to happen (even in the US), subsidized or not - I am bullish on solar.

  • On 9 Jul 2014 in Ever Wondered How They Got Promoted ?, mell said:

    corntrollio says

    E-man says

    There was a rumor in my ex-company that the receptionist slept with the boss. That was how she got a $10k raise over night.

    Yeah, I bet she got a raise overnight.

    Occam's razor dictates that this is most likely how it went down.

  • On 2 Jul 2014 in Radical Stupidity: Academics Endorse $20,000 Income for Everyone, Working or Not, mell said:

    A flat income tax is the way to go, 1-3 (e.g. 0%, 15%, 25%) brackets max. In times of high deficits you can levy a surcharge on the most wealthy but it must be written into law that this can only be a temporary surcharge (fee vs tax) so it cannot be abused. No negative effective tax rate bullshit and no taxes over 25%. Close all loopholes, start with real estate, that will be the biggest bang for the buck. Remove QE. The Republican tax plan floating around for a while would have been a step into the right direction (flat tax, doing away with mortgage deduction etc.).

  • On 2 Jul 2014 in Radical Stupidity: Academics Endorse $20,000 Income for Everyone, Working or Not, mell said:

    tatupu70 says

    I agree. That's what we get by electing free market zealots.

    Come on now, there is NOTHING free about the crony sectors - turtledove nailed it. If you want to see mostly free market health care and reasonable prices, you have to look here:

    http://www.healthcitycaymanislands.com/

    The 2008 bailouts - besides being outright criminal - have caused this current environment of stagflation, and there is nothing FREE about forced bailouts at the expense of the taxpayer. That was a good joke though!

  • On 1 Jul 2014 in I'm confused are vaccines effective or NOT?, mell said:

    Captn, there is the advantage of herd immunity and the possibility of eradicating or severely suppressing a virus/pathogen. Also, theoretically you could pass it on to somebody who cannot take vaccines for health reasons. Having said that, this should not lead to forced vaccinations unless in very extreme cases of deadly epidemics (and only temporally) which there obviously currently aren't any. Not every vaccine is useful (or effective) for an elderly, adult, or kid, and they can certainly be harmful. One thing that can be done is stretching out necessary vaccinations, separating them as much as possible.

  • On 1 Jul 2014 in Hobby Lobby wins Supreme Court case, mell said:

    dodgerfanjohn says

    Lol@ poking the bee hive.

    Certain things agitate Republicans, this would be one of those things that agitates Dems. And nearly all of it on both sides completely ridiculous and marginally consequential.

    Agreed. This is bullshit distraction from real problems.

  • On 1 Jul 2014 in "BEWARE" The Pitchforks Are Coming!!!, mell said:

    Strategist says

    IF the middle class is poorer its certainly not because Warren Buffett is richer.

    No that's exactly it. The upper middle class and upper class (not to be confused with wealthy, rich, or 1%) pays for all this bullshit criminal bailouts that helped Buffet, AIG and some TBTF banks to avoid bankruptcy.

  • On 1 Jul 2014 in "BEWARE" The Pitchforks Are Coming!!!, mell said:

    Diva24 says

    So Buffet "rejected" the idea that the stock market is rigged? Yeah, and I shit $100 bills...

    What he meant is that it's not rigged in your favor, because you aren't him and thus not eternally backstopped by the taxpayer.

  • On 26 Jun 2014 in John Boehner suing Obama., mell said:

    They should all be sued and impeached every-time they take an executive action in a realm where clearly congressional approval and/or formal declarations are required, such as warmongering. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter, it's about the rule of law.

  • On 26 Jun 2014 in Sen. Rand Paul Kicks Warmonger Butt On Sunday Talk Shows, mell said:

    Great video. He knows and respects the constitution and the history how we got there and is actually telling the truth, going against quite a few warmongers in his own party.

  • On 23 Jun 2014 in Gen X And Gen Y: The Boomers Stole your Wealth, mell said:

    HEY YOU says

    All they have to do is text,post Selfies on social sites & buy the newest phone & they will become rich.

    What an abomination, er, I mean obamanation!

  • On 23 Jun 2014 in finding a rental in Mountain View / west Sunnyvale, mell said:

    buffer says

    sc mountains are not an option... MV is midway between our jobs.

    I wouldn't mind, but wife has DQ'd mobile home.

    Then let her pay.

  • On 23 Jun 2014 in Buy A House For $213,000 If You Can Because Prices Will Only Go Up From Here, mell said:

    They are plastering San Francisco financial district/south beach area right now with cheaply built condos in record time. The traffic is already collapsing, throw in a giants game and it's gridlock, just in time for cannibal anarchy.

  • On 23 Jun 2014 in Don't buy near fields where pesticides are used., mell said:

    HuggyBumbers McLovkins says

    Prepare for a raft of Monsanto, ADM, and ConAgra studies casting doubt on these findings. Fox News will step up with panels of experts to preach about sound science, and recite 1,000,000 times that the issue is still controversial, with only corrupt university researchers believing that pesticides can be harmful in this way.

    Soon wingnut Internet forum posters will be making all kinds of jokes about Al Gore being effeminate, and pesticide autism being the biggest scam ever.

    In this matter there are no party lines. Fox has been recently promoting organic advocates (albeit not very scientific ones) while some left-leaning scientists side with GMOs and pesticides, it's all over the map. If you watched the corporation, one of the bigger scandals researched was taken on by former FOX reporters (Akre et. al)- unfortunately they eventually got fired after the station bowed to pressure from Monsanto ;)

  • On 22 Jun 2014 in Even the Newcorp rag Wall Street Journal is turning against Republicans on Iraq, mell said:

    So did Megyn Kelly on FOX:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/19/megyn-kelly-dick-cheney-iraq_n_5510635.html

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    Bellingham Bill says

    again, talking (D) vs (R) confuses the issue.

    The real divide in this country is left vs right, liberal vs. conservative, progressive vs. reactionary.

    Where would you put Ron Paul in this matrix? Or Bernie Sanders? Dennis Kucinich? I agree that a lot of people distinguish themselves from their political "enemies" along those lines, but there are also quite a few who cannot be categorized that easily. And they often are leaders in preserving civil liberties and freedom while opposing warmongering and fascism.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    iwog says

    mell says

    Plus there is impeachment

    This is just fucking stupid.

    What's stupid is your theater about the horrors of this war and all the innocent people killed but then throwing up your hands in the face of bold faced lies and warmongering with a "what can you do?" attitude when it comes to the most powerful people in this country not having the balls to stand up but endorse this shit. Doesn't compute logically and since you like to use logic so much this is very easy to infer.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    iwog says

    mell says

    Agreed on how fucked up it was to invade Iraq, but the Democrats could have stopped it.

    Short of a unanimous filibuster, the Democrats had no way of stopping the Iraq war. Bush was the commander in chief. The responsibility for this disgrace is on him and the ignorant people who voted for him.

    Not true, it is illegal to go to war without a formal declaration. Even if you think otherwise, if roughly half of the rulers of the US would have revolted against the president in such an important issue he would have never had enough solidarity from anyone to go to war. Plus there is impeachment and many other tools but the truth is they endorsed that war.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    HuggyBumbers McLovkins says

    Yes: Obama perpetuated the Patriot Act.

    Now how, exactly does this exonerate libertarians in 2003 who lined up to support it?

    I didn't say there were a lot of Libertarians anywhere. Those who voted in favor are not Libertarians. However, just because somebody votes once against a war like Iraq or the patriot act does not make them instantly Libertarian. It's a question of consistency and you have to have a consistent record. The people you refer to are not Libertarians.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    HuggyBumbers McLovkins says

    Same for the Patriot Act: all the native samples of Gunnutus Americanus, having lectured us all about trading liberty for safety, insisted we trade liberty for safety at that time.

    What planet are you on? In this day and age where the prez can drone-kill anyone and go to war with everyone without any formal declaration he can certainly easily veto the patriot act (extension). What did Obummer do? Oh right, he signed it.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    HuggyBumbers McLovkins says

    The libertarians I knew at the time were red-faced with screaming "Liberals are friends of Saddam if they oppose this!" over and over.

    You can look em up if you know how to use the web - I gave you one name. By the way there is a whole Libertarian party, no need to go Democrat if you truly abhor that war so much. Same for the patriot act - you will go nowhere by voting either Democrat or Republican. But you can still support a Democrat or presidential candidate (e.g. Ron Paul) who does not conform to the party line.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    iwog says

    127 Democrats, a clear majority of the Democratic caucus voted against this atrocity.

    Justify it however you wish, however the reality is that president Gore would not have been this stupid and would not have waged war against a country that was not a proven threat.

    It's a fucking WAR and you Republican shitheads need to stop treating it like a football game.

    Agreed on how fucked up it was to invade Iraq, but the Democrats could have stopped it. Independents and Libertarians opposed the wear as well, more-so than most Democrats. But nobody was actively trying to stop Bush, and congress could have done that easily, but decided to stand by idly and endorse silently. Formal declarations of war don't seem to be en vogue anymore (with Dems and Repubs), but are technically required. But you need to challenge your anger a little, if you really cared about a non-interventionist president, you would (have) support(ed) Ron Paul.

  • On 20 Jun 2014 in Republicans need to admit they fucked up, mell said:

    Dems=Repubs, funny that some still manage to get a kick out of the one-party system. To war with Oceania! ;)

    "Handing Bush a major victory, the Democratic-led Senate voted 77-23 for a war powers resolution negotiated between the White House and congressional leaders backing a possible use of force to rid Iraq of suspected weapons of mass destruction and possibly oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

    The Republican-led House earlier on Thursday passed it 296-133."

Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 208 milliseconds to create.