starrymessenger

You are right of course. Thank you. Wasn't confusing datology, just forgot.

They are not absolved of course but the impetus comes from the clerics they likely regret being in partnership with, as well as the unwashed masses. Don't forget their rule is fragile and thats probably why the age old compact perists. Picture them trying to ride a two ton Bramah bull. No, the House of Saud allied itself with Mr Wahhabi himself in the early 14th century in order to consolidate their hold on theArabian Peninsula.

Sure, and the mini mo Quataris. But the bearded bosses try and keep it under control IMO. They like money as much as they hate the Shia. And they periodically crown the crazies with ashtrays whenever they jump up and down too much - just as the Turks used to do back in the good old days of the Ottoman empire.

Its not rocket surgery. Wasting money through administrative inefficiency and duplication is not good. Subsidizing a permanent sub population of morons living off the fat of the land is not good. Providing the underprivileged with assistance and opportunity is good - for everyone.

Shakespeare couldn't spell either. For sure they don't like Shias, but the crazies give them more trouble than they are worth these days. 700 years ago it was a deal the House of Saud had to make.

Pick six IMO

Phew...

Is our historic comeback record in danger?

We the guys we deal with are not cazy. They like money and they have a country to run Problem is they made a deal with the devil 700 years ago. They probably regret it.

Except for the Saudi extremists of course, of which there are many. In fact they are institutionalized, and therefore legitimized, as the state religion.

False stat. Play like we do.

Guy stays in bounds, dumb playcall, waste the 2 minute warning. They play like the Bills.

Agree. Maybe Whaley can finally let go now that he has a new deal.

Second time he overthrows him badly for 6

Boy Kelce is really athletic for a big guy.

I thought the book on Tom was pressure up the middle. I'm not seeing it. Maybe KC doesn't have the right horses?

I agree and I pay income tax at a 50% combined federal and provincial rate in Canada. I guess that makes me a liberal democrat in a US context.

Billick says you can't win with just a great D. Game must have changed because he did exactly that.

Not being able to make the timing throws they are talking about puts too much pressure on your run first offence and makes it a lot easier to defend. Also there are times, often later in games, where you don't have the luxury of relying on even a very good running game. A franchise QB has to be able to beat you with his arm when he needs to. I think thats all they are saying. If Tatlor can (learn) to do that he will be one of the hardest QBs to defend against and the Bills O should be very productive.

I thought having an opinion from a player, even if he's not acknowledged to be a great mind of the game (what active player outside of a few sure fire HoFamers would be) was a great move. Without the views of a person who knows Taylor personally and close up, in the lockerroom and in the huddle, the article would not have been nearly as good, indeed, incomplete. Wood was the right player to ask, and I say that realizing that he was'nt going to take his QB down.

His hit was worse than Burfict's IMO. He should have been suspended too.

He wasn't faking it but he wasn't out cold either. Bernard was out cold. Hope they are both ok.

Clarity is very desireable whether whether your tax system features a single rate or not. Clarity is the responsibility and should be the objective of the legislative draftsman. Thinking and expressing your thoughts clearly is an indispensible attribute of the legal system, including tax laws. My point was simply that a progressive marginal rate structure by itself probably contributes relatively little to the complexity of tax laws. Taxation is too powerful and effective a tool for the implementation of social and economic policy through its creation of incentives and disincentives that influence and modify behavior. So I think as long as your country in its various activities and endeavours is complicated, and of course it is, your tax laws will be similarly complicated. Compliant rate payers who are also high income earners probably pay more tax under the current rate structure than they would under the flat rate and of course more than low income earners. B-Man makes the point that 10% of a large number is more than 10% of a smaller one. True, but 35% of that bigger number is more than 10% of that number. Its another way of addressing your point that marginal rates are just too high. You think that higher rates for the wealthy (because they are the ones who have to pay them) are immoral. Idk if I'd put it in those terms but ultimately its probably a lever, possibly an ineffective one, against the disparity of social and economic classes. The use and application of the proceeds of taxation can obviously be a much better tool in service of the same goal. If high rates of tax are immoral at least you have the satisfaction of holding the moral high ground relative to almost every other western democracy.

Or Travis Benjamin, who is what Goodwin was supposed to be.

Tax evaders abetted by the wealth management divisions of Swiss and other European banks, and generally individuals and corporations who have the resources to hire expert advisors who can find a way. Amazing how the US tax law enables conglomerates like Tyco to avoid the corporate income tax by setting up brassplate "head offices" offshore. Oh yeah, they do also hold their annual meetings there - anyone up for a trip to Bermuda? For a country that is generally not shy about asserting the extraterritorial effect of its laws its amazing how easy it can be to neuter them. Meanwhile I have no doubt that IRS agents are good at beating up on the little guy they can easily get their hands on because he's not in Bermuda. I'm sure that rich folks would like a non-progressive rate structure and a flat 10% tax. Net marginal rates I would think are for them normally much higher even after application of deductions and credits. And the source of the alleged increased investment is obviously tax savings so whoever is most saving taxes is presumably investing - unless he's just giving it to the Swiss bankers of course. In fairness, an effort is made to correct abuses. When Swiss banks were threatened with loss of their US banking licences it resulted in emergency meetings of the Swiss federal and Cantonal governments, better oversight and large fines. Thing is it usually takes a long time to uncover wrongdoing or practices that are contrary to tax policy even if they are not unlawful. It can take decades. At the end of the day, the top 1% of the tax paying public don't account for much of the national revenue. The rate structure is there more to promote tax equity amongst the different tax paying classes. As for the argument that a flat tax simplifies the tax system and therefore the costs of tax administration, I would doubt that the progressive rate structure accounts for much of the Code's volume. Tax is quite simply too powerful an instrument of social and economic policy, whatever your policy preferences may be, for tax laws to be meaningfully simplified at the end of the day. If you cannot even simplify and clarify the NFL rulebook, good luck taking on the Code and the regulations.