They are a multinational hundred billion dollar company because of what a guy invented who is dead now. They have done nothing since. But that should work well for them in the long run.

This is why people yell. Because these aren’t facts. This is all alternative crap from the creationist playbook with the exact intent to muddle and mess with the truth.

There are facts involved with creationism?

Penn & Teller changed their minds on a lot of things they said on Bullshit!, most notably climate change. They’ve even said that they wanted to do one more season called “The Bullshit of Bullshit!” At least Penn has; Teller’s been remarkably quiet.

If by “decades” you mean, as long as we had income taxes, then yes, that is correct.

The clue is in the title capital gains tax. you are paying tax on what extra income is generated from your investment. Not the investment itself. QED no double taxation.

Every time money changes hands it is taxed. You get taxes taken out of your paycheck, then when you buy a new car you pay taxes again. It doesn’t mean you were taxed twice, it means money changed hands.

I don’t agree with the “income from sitting on your ass” of capital gains. It’s income from risking your savings to help others generate work and jobs.

“There’s plenty of reason to consider having capital gains rates be lower than wage income.”

Such as?  

thats really bad logic. sorry. just because you bought an asset with post-tax dollars, that does not mean you ‘paid taxes twice’ when that thing makes you more money.

Or......... it may have the opposite effect. For people to find better investments than just throwing money into private companies whose under pressure to maximize profit every quarter... usually to the detriment of their employees as laying off employees is the easiest way to improve the bottom line.

If you live in a major metro, you’ve likely driven near, around, and been passed by a Tesla on autopilot. How are you alive enough to type?!

Yes i liked the way they killed off his dad in Smallville vs. MoS. Having him die of a heart attack was a great way to show the vulnerability of Clark, He has all this power in the world but he can’t stop a blood clot from killing his father. I wasn’t as big of a fan about the circumstances around the heart attack but…

You can easily have a Superman that doesn’t save everyone, but who still doesn’t kill. There can be interesting stories about how he can’t save everyone, about how even his vast powers just aren’t enough, and how that effects him* - and end up with a Superman who is still good and essentially hopeful, rather than dour…

What did it add to the character?

Killing Zod could be fine, but Snyder - as usual - doesn’t even understand his own ramifications he’s trying to present:

I think it gets to a lot of the issues in Snyder’s work: potentially cool ideas that are never fully developed. Man of Steel was full of them.

Which to me indicates bad writing. They forced themselves into a bottleneck where the only option was “neck snapping” and character assassination.

Except the movie sets up Supes as Space Jesus. Then decides that Jesus needs to kill a guy in order to save a family that could have easily be avoided. It was dumb, and it was the moment that set the entire DC movie ‘verse down a very dumb path.

you know I have avoided finding out what zack Snyder looks like all these years, and he looks about exactly as you would expect. Its like Jake Paralta from Brooklyn 99 and The Douche from Parks and Recreation had a terrible baby.