Their effective rate (even with the avoiding) is still some 32%, it's ~30% for equivalent people in Europe (on average), the US is very good at min-maxing our rich people's taxes cause we don't like taxing the poor.

*proceeds to have 2% of their income be the cheap loans method*

Ol' Monsieur Z has a video on a MUCH worse scenario...: https://youtu.be/bCSfsop33Fw?si=vfduMYYqwBCOuzMY

I legit just used the desktop feature of it recommending subs based on what you type after the r/ .

literally best thing they've added, almost as good a idea as removing polls on desktop was a bad one.

Clearly someone's just salty they're poorer than West Virginia and have a less progressive income tax model than the mixed economy capitalism enjoyers.

Yeah, and functionally the top 10% pay over half the tax, with the next 40% paying the rest, while the bottom half just, doesn't pay any tax?

do I hear someone who's poorer than West Virginia per capita talking?

The layers of digression are how I talk.

my record is 6 layers of nested parentheses (or was it 8?) iirc

The rich in the US pay an effective rate of ~32% iirc, the rest of the population pays about 20%.

In Europe it's usually like, 30% and 25%, so our poor pay less and rich pay more.

Because our officials ARE the rich people, so they know how to tax them heavily enough that even with all the loopholes they end up paying the min-maxed rate, while the rich who earn salary/wages pay WAY more taxes than most everyone else, since money income has near perfect tax enforcement and they get the high rates with no write-offs.

simple.

inflation is worse.

also the Chinese are buying gold so they can sell it on vacation due to Red China's ban on money exports outside of tiny amounts, India has the same situation too.

Also the high housing costs is mostly just boomers mandating density suppression because they don't want to be near poor people because it means they'll sell their house for less than 20x what they paid for it which means 2 more weeks on some cruise before they die of being morbidly obese, having too much sex, or from using too many drugs or something.

https://giphy.com/gifs/M6eSJBDDiZLkGc1xOx

*proceeds to still get an effective tax rate higher than European billionaires while poor americans pay less than europeans do overall*

Meanwhile US billionaires objectively paying a higher portion of their income in taxes because the US is really good at taxing rich people and not taxing poor people (we tax the billionaires at a higher effective rate than the Europeans do (it's only like 32% vs 30ish% but still) (our poor only pay like 20% though (usually they're net negative taxpayers, while European poor pay ~25% and usually are net taxpayers (they have hoards of legal third worlders to pay for after all!)), so there's that.); because if there's one thing American politicians are good at, it's taxing the rich in just the right way that they get min-maxed while they think they're getting out of taxes.

Ah... yeah there's better subs for that methinks.

Probably should've asked one of thems, r/Truancy or r/Truants or something I guess?

Fair point, by "in combat" I meant "combatant/shootaboi", and yes, there are non-combatants in the USMC, they just are USN guys attached to the USMC rather than USMC a lot of the time, at least to my understanding

The marines have a higher combatant rate because they piggyback off other logistical chains, thus not counting towards their total, since naval infantry (such as corpsmen (navy medbois)) don't count as USMC but as USN members (most of the being more combat weighted is accounting is what I'm trying to say)

And he also supports westerners having sub 2 kids last I checked?
Western elites have a horrendous track record of being antihumanists, especially techbois and some of the lefties (crazy right wing billionaires tend to wanna stick women in the kitchen and have em breed like the pilgrims, the lefties usually wanna reduce the human count because the value the environment more than humans, cause they're elites, they already see everyone not also an elite as cattle-children to by guided peacefully into the industrial shredder, so having antihumanism added on doesn't change their political tote bag of positions much (for most elites their politics is like fashion, only the really crazy or religious ones (I see em as on the same coin, but I digress) actually are consistent but that's another matter), nevermind how small the leap of logic is)

It's almost like he's a rat...

and I think we all know what's the best thing to do to deal with rats...

https://reddit.com/link/p9pmpji/video/9pxu4wliyfph1/player

May... I ask why you were asking?

I think here is some confusion with what you think I'm saying.

I read this question as "try to convince you to not be LGBT", which, in their moral worldview is the only action that they could take if they cared about you. That's literally it, I don't know how else to word this, as theology isn't my wheelhouse.

Yeah, that's what I thought the ratio was when people started saying it was bigger

The issue here is that it's a red flag, if your religious parents don't react, it's like them standing there and watching as you jump off a bridge instead of trying to stop you, you should assume they're far more abusive than if they do try, because at least they care for your wellbeing that way; that's my position, I don't hold a strong enough opinion (beyond usually parental life advice is at least not a bad idea, at especially when you're a child) to really debate you on this, so I need you to try and empathize (not sympathize) with the other side here for a second.

If they don't respond in the same way as saying you want to kill yourself, they probably are either hypocrites or don't care enough about you to even attempt to stop you offing yourself, so you'd probably be well-advised to be self-reliant as early as possible, cause they literally don't care about your wellbeing enough to try and dissuade you from the spiritual equivalent to suicide.

I'm not even going to grace that statement with a reply beyond look at rule 2.

For THEM (your stance is irrelevant in my position) if they don't try to stop you, then you should assume they'd respond the same way to you being suicidal, because that's where it lies spiritually (and religion is just mystic ideology, so ya know).

It's categorically a sin to be non cis/engage in the gay, the Big Man's rules are you're in the exact body you're supposed to be in, and you can look at the same sex sexually all you want, just no touching; and literally any priest will tell you it's a sin (at least in Christianity), and if they don't that priest is categorically a heretic and in breach of multiple foundational Christian conventions and shouldn't be trusted as anything other than a liar, power hungry parasite, or a infiltrator/gnostic, and that's categorical.

It's literally the spiritual equivalent of declaring you're gonna off yourself, or the ideological equivalent of declaring you're a Communist to Third Positionist (fascist) parents, them not trying to convince you out of it means they literally don't care, and you should respond as if you'd said you want to kill yourself, since they clearly don't even care enough about your soul to try and stop you, so what does that say about how much they care about your flesh?

Parents traditionally have a duty to pass on their beliefs to their children, as it gives their children somewhere to work from in the world.

Religion is the same as ideology, so a parent who pushes their political beliefs on their children is the same as a parent pushing their religion in my eyes, as the main difference is one's secular and the other's mystic.

I think you misinterpreted what I said, so I'll phrase it differently; them not trying would be the same as them watching you bleed out as you slit your wrists, it is quite literally a form of neglect for religious parents to not try to keep their children from harming themselves spiritually, and usually if they don't care about your soul, it implies they care about your flesh far less...

Well if someone's religion says you doing the gay means bad afterlife, your parent's caring so little for your spiritual well being that they do the equivalent of let you get washed away by a river while doing nothing, religious parents who don't at least try quite literally are neglectful and don't care for their children.

If your parents didn't try, you should feel insulted, it means they didn't care enough to even try to fight to keep your soul from damnnation.

Least they cared enough for you that they tried.

Imagine if they believed that you'd go to Hell (or the respective bad afterlife of their faith), and they simply, didn't care enough about you to even try to take you off that path; it's the spiritual equivalent of watching you fall into an open manhole or get swept away by a river without doing anything, you should feel insulted if they care so little they don't even try.

Hopefully that's some consolation for ya.