Both appear to be in use, the author succesfully communicated what they intended to communicate, and the audience (you) succesfully recieved the communication.
Choosing not to look at an ad, and blocking it are different things. One is totally ok, the other incurs a monetary loss on the creator. Those services aren't free to run, and the content doesn't take zero time to create. It also incentivizes creating content focused on those who cannot figure out ad blocking.
Support for Trump, or even Republicans writ large, means support for reducing taxes (both estate and income) on the wealthy, while increasing them on consumers (via tariffs). Musk has been an ardent supporter of Trump.
While I don't disagree with your conclusion, this line of reasoning makes no sense in a two party state where each party offers a menu of positions. Supporters are forced to make tradeoffs and pretending otherwise just gives you an incoherent picture of reality.
"Two party state" as in a government where politics are bifurcated. In a one party state, a citizen's voting history isn't informative whatsoever about their beliefs. In a direct democracy, their votes give you a complete map of the positions on any issue that came up. In the US, we only know that an R voter prefers the entire set of R policies over the entire set of D policies. Maybe they're pro-taxes, pro-welfare, anti-immigrant, pro-life, and pro-gun, and they weight these positions such that it makes sense to sacrifice the taxes and welfare to get the rest. So, while the party is anti-taxes, everyone who supports it may not be.
To hell with writing a test for you. That’s what you say to someone who gets paid by you. If the project doesn’t want the fix. That’s their issue, not the reporter’s.
Look at the big picture. The maintainers likely deal with many low-quality bug reports and PRs coming in, especially from AI, and the incentive to spam these is not going away anytime soon. How should they best allocate their limited attention?
One way is for the PR maker to signal their own attention to detail/effort/commitment by jumping through the (quite reasonable) hoop of writing a test.
Is this extra effort? Yes. But if your motivation in opening the PR in the first place is genuinely to improve the world, then do the slightly harder thing that actually improves the world given the constraints on maintainer attention it operates under, not the thing that is slightly easier for you but leaves your contribution indistinguishable from the sea of slop out there.
Having the equivalent jq expression in these examples might help to compare expressiveness, and it might help me see if jq could “just” use a DFA when a (sub)query admits one. grep, ripgrep, etc change algorithms based on the query and that makes the speed improvements automatic.
If I have X dollars and get taxed such that I have X * T after the taxing, say T = (1 - .20), then I invest and that money grows by a factor, say G = (1 + .50), over the years, then in the mean time inflation hits and reduces my money by a factor, say I = (1 - .10), so that what I end up with in the end is F = X * G * T * I. If instead I invested and grew and inflated and then got taxed, X * G * I * T, it would be exactly the same. Multiplication is commutative.
What you are doing by delaying taxes is hoping you have a lower rate later. Say you make less in retirement or die untaxed and your kids get a step up in basis. But without a change in rate (which might go up even), there’s no difference.
If you take a loan against your larger capital pool, inflation helps you (to the extent it wasn't incorporated in higher lending costs).
But yeah that's a second order effect. There aren't really any scenarios where you have a fixed nominal tax that can be deferred without locking up the money, so I think you're mostly right that it comes back to lower tax rate and step-up.
> Nothing this administration ever does is planned.
You are joking, right? Project 2025 has achieved 50% of its goals in record time[0]. Trump disavowed both it and invading Iran, but make no mistake. Both were “the plan”.
"this administration" is not running the show. This is going exactly according to someone else's plan.
After the dust settles:
- GCC is knocked down a few notches and that oil and gas money is no longer competing for influence
- US is out of MENA and Centcom will return to Florida; there is no way Arab governments will let US rebuild its bases in their countries. See burning infrastructure, airports, and decimated trade in tourism, air travel, hitech, ... You thought the Orange One thought up the idea of burning all our aliances, pissing off Europe, alarming Asia allies, and making "fortress America" all by his lonesome? Really?
- Israel will be lording it over the area. Maybe they will start having bases on Arab lands.
- China will be at the mercy of whoever now controls Middle East
- Project 2025 is really about controlling us natives here in America when the coin finally (dear lord) drops over here.
Most of the smaller, walkable places that are not car dependent do not allow that Prop 13 transfer, because it's mostly rental places.
Condo defect law is far far more onerous than defect law for single family homes, to the point that it doesn't make sense to offer units for sale. There are those working on reform but it's a slow process.
I have see it happen with older friends: they could move to a smaller place that's more appropriate but they'd had to pay a ton more.
The Prop 13 distortion on the market is very extreme. Perhaps even more so than the super low pandemic interest rates compared to today's interest rates.
