No more discussion of election fraud

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    Obscene tax breaks??? You mean that not stealing their money is a break? Somehow that is welfare? It is THEIR MONEY. Washington doesnt need more money. We need a third party no doubt. Look at the republicans in Indiana. I got into a discussion with my representative and she said that look at what good they have done. That we have a 350 million dollar surplus! To which i simply stated that it isnt your job to take my money and save it. If you have extra it means you stole too much from the people. That is a fact. Now they tax items on the internet. Republicans done this. democrats wanted to but the republicans doing their grandstanding stopped it. Now they do it. we need a third party that is actually for the people.
    Much as I often disagree with Jetta I am with him here. I don't think he is taking a leftist view of taxation but rather objecting to some people getting favorable tax structures not available to the rest of us in our capacities of small to medium businesses or our personal taxes.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,650
    113
    Gtown-ish
    If there is no living human being who has "standing" to challenge the crookedest election in our history, damn straight Parker is going to lose against the propaganda machine. Hell, they probably don't even have "standing" to get their day in court.

    I think you guys are looking exclusively at one set of facts and interpret it through your lens. That's not a great way to view all of reality.
     

    Hatin Since 87

    Bacon Hater
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 31, 2018
    11,575
    77
    Mooresville
    Much as I often disagree with Jetta I am with him here. I don't think he is taking a leftist view of taxation but rather objecting to some people getting favorable tax structures not available to the rest of us in our capacities of small to medium businesses or our personal taxes.
    I agree, except I don’t want their taxes raised to match mine, I want mine lowered to match theirs. i want the same tax breaks, the same tax bracket for every small, medium, and big business, as well as personal taxes. Lower all of our taxes, we all pay the same percentage, and cut the nonsense government waste money on in order to do so.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    I agree, except I don’t want their taxes raised to match mine, I want mine lowered to match theirs. i want the same tax breaks, the same tax bracket for every small, medium, and big business, as well as personal taxes. Lower all of our taxes, we all pay the same percentage, and cut the nonsense government waste money on in order to do so.
    No disagreement here!
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,650
    113
    Gtown-ish
    OK, that's more practical - AWS starts de-platforming, we start publicly cancelling Amazon from our lives, and fight to stop them from getting obscene tax breaks.

    For me, that squares up with the high road.
    Ooh. Better change that word to something less violent. Because when you say "fight" it obviously always means violence. Unless you're an off the rails progressive. Then you get to be as violent as you want to be. Just carry the right signage.

    Seriously, though, I think the "high road" discussion is for pussies. It just comes off as a smarmy sort of virtue signaling. "do better." :rolleyes:

    But if you're simply advocating for choosing the most peaceful means to achieve goals, I totally agree with that. I doubt most people can cancel Amazon from their lives. Well. At least not until season 6 of The Expanse is over. And people need their cheap **** from China peddled by Amazon. So that's probably not going anywhere unless a viable alternative to Amazon springs forth. I'd be open to an anti-trust suit to break up Amazon's little empires. I mean. I'm not a chamber-o-commerce ho.

    The tax thing I'm quite on board with. Municipalities bribing big corporations with tax breaks to locate in their jurisdictions on the backs of the local tax payers should be a crime.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,985
    113
    North Central
    Wait. Let's may sure we're talking about the same thing. Okay, so what if someone uses Gmail to discuss some kind of crime they commit. I think that would be clearly against Google's ToS. I think what would happen is that they would flag the email and deal with it, possibly call law enforcement.

    Parler runs their app on AWS servers. Gmail runs on Google's servers. So it's not even possible for the Gmail example to analogous to Parler. But just as Gmail is expected to flag that email, Parler is expected and required by the ToS with Amazon to flag such posts and take the appropriate action. The one where someone was encouraging the assassination of Pence, shoul have been flagged, the authorities called, and the user who posted it banned or suspended. The problem was, AWS alleged that Parler wasn't doing that.

    They were just letting the stuff go. And maybe it's an issue where they just don't have the expertise and technology to be able to do that. Gmail uses AI to read EVERYONE's mail so that they can sell you cheap **** from China. I'm pretty sure their bots also are designed to detect communications which break the law.

    Umm, what you say Parler had to do is the reason 230 was created. Parler is not the publisher, and therefore not responsible in any way. Now if they did violate AWS tos isn't that ironic that a company that enjoys 230 protection takes it away from others...
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,985
    113
    North Central
    It looks to me like the big tech companies help each other, to sort of promote or protect each other. How to prove that in court I don't know. Of course it still has to be litigated, but Amazon's accusation is pretty clear. That Parler did not make reasonable efforts to remove those kinds of posts.

    There's a list floating around the internet of some "parleys" (for those unfamiliar, they're analogous to "tweets") that Amazon used in their brief in response to Parler's request for an injunction. They allege that those parleys were not taken down even after being warned about them. Also, it looked like Amazon was saying that they've been discussing this issue with Parler for weeks, not days. So that predates the insurrection. I'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I kinda think Parler will lose.

    For those of you losing your ****, fixin' ta hit reply "how dare you take big tech's side" :runaway: because I said that, it's an "is" discussion, not a "should" discussion. Personally, I suspect some of it is big tech trying to stamp out newcomers into the space, so that they can continue to control what they control now. I'd really like to see that exposed through all of this somehow. But it does not sound like Parler help themselves any.

    Hell. If it was my company on the line, I'd make sure the ToU at least covers their own requirements from Amazon's ToS. I'd also be looking to hire AI experts to start development immediately on a system to ensure their compliance. I mean, it's their business on the line. For short term, I'd purpose a team to sift through the parlays for offensive language. And some tools could be developed pretty quickly to aid that. And far off planning, I'd be looking at developing an in-house platform to run Parley's services.
    Why not allow the authorities too do their job and maintain their 230 protections?
     

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,066
    113
    NWI
    I agree, except I don’t want their taxes raised to match mine, I want mine lowered to match theirs. i want the same tax breaks, the same tax bracket for every small, medium, and big business, as well as personal taxes. Lower all of our taxes, we all pay the same percentage, and cut the nonsense government waste money on in order to do so.
    That is a pipe dream.

    Biden has promised to roll back the Trump tax breaks.

    I am surprised there is not more or as much talk about this than his anti gun stance.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,541
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Ooh. Better change that word to something less violent. Because when you say "fight" it obviously always means violence. Unless you're an off the rails progressive. Then you get to be as violent as you want to be. Just carry the right signage.

    Seriously, though, I think the "high road" discussion is for pussies. It just comes off as a smarmy sort of virtue signaling. "do better." :rolleyes:
    Meh, Bug already labels me as such.

    In a similar way, there's virtue signalling with, "I'm going to get in the mud and fight!" and the most that is done is carping on a web forum.


    That's the best I got this morning need more :coffee:.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    16,053
    113
    That is a pipe dream.

    Biden has promised to roll back the Trump tax breaks.

    I am surprised there is not more or as much talk about this than his anti gun stance.
    All of the breaks or only on those below a certain income level?
     

    pappyon

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 17, 2020
    219
    43
    Half of the people in this country do not pay income tax. That is wrong. wheres your fair share theory??? Not only do they not pay anything they get a huge check in the earned income credit. Corporations pay. They pay huge. Most of you have no idea how much. That is why they move their business to another country. I know one particular individual who had an injection molding business. He busted his ass. worked out of his garage. Then bought a building. Had about 3 dozen employees. The taxes killed him so he went across the border. He still pays a good wage. He has to pay for his material to be hauled not only across the border but also have his product shipped back to companies in the USA. And in the end he makes a lot more in his pocket. Would it not be best to let him keep HIS OWN MONEY? Keep jobs here? If you knew what a corporation pays it would make you sick. The government does not need more money. They waste it. Let the people who actually earn it keep theirs. Income tax, property tax, unemployment tax, corporation tax just to name a few. But the list is much larger.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,650
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Umm, what you say Parler had to do is the reason 230 was created. Parler is not the publisher, and therefore not responsible in any way. Now if they did violate AWS tos isn't that ironic that a company that enjoys 230 protection takes it away from others...
    Keep it between the rails. I'm saying what is. Not what should be. You keep arguing against the points you want me to have made so that you have something to argue about.

    Amazon has a ToS. They claim Parler violated their ToS. They have a good case. I haven't seen Parler's rebuttal yet. Maybe it's a good one.

    Your sense of irony isn't relative to that. It only matters that Parler, according to Amazon's allegations, did not do anything to stop people from using their platform to incite violence and plan their insurrection. Maybe Parler did take steps. Maybe they didn't violate the ToS. We'll see.

    But if Parler gets shut down because of this, they would be the ones at fault if the allegations are true. Inciting violence and plotting insurrection is not protected speech. Amazon has every right to disallow that on the systems that use their services. And every user of their services is obligated to take steps to prevent it.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,650
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Why not allow the authorities too do their job and maintain their 230 protections?
    If it were my company instead of Jeff Bozos, I would heed my lawyers advice too, and put that in the ToS to cover my ass, just in case. And I would hold users of my services to that. You will not allow people to use your platforms running on my services to plot insurrection. Again, their allegation is that Parler did not take steps against users doing this, or even to flag or remove their parlees. And as I said, we'll see as this unfolds whether or not Parler has a decent rebuttal to the accusations.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    If it were my company instead of Jeff Bozos, I would heed my lawyers advice too, and put that in the ToS to cover my ass, just in case. And I would hold users of my services to that. You will not allow people to use your platforms running on my services to plot insurrection. Again, their allegation is that Parler did not take steps against users doing this, or even to flag or remove their parlees. And as I said, we'll see as this unfolds whether or not Parler has a decent rebuttal to the accusations.
    Doesn't Besos also host Twitter? I read the other day what several national leaders said about Trump getting cut off. The Mexican Prez says he gets death threats via Twitter on a regular basis (and nothing done about it).
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,985
    113
    North Central
    If it were my company instead of Jeff Bozos, I would heed my lawyers advice too, and put that in the ToS to cover my ass, just in case. And I would hold users of my services to that. You will not allow people to use your platforms running on my services to plot insurrection. Again, their allegation is that Parler did not take steps against users doing this, or even to flag or remove their parlees. And as I said, we'll see as this unfolds whether or not Parler has a decent rebuttal to the accusations.

    One thing they will show is the implementation of the tos is arbitrary and capricious to Parler specifically since they allow others to engage in similar speech and have for years.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,985
    113
    North Central
    Keep it between the rails. I'm saying what is. Not what should be. You keep arguing against the points you want me to have made so that you have something to argue about.

    Amazon has a ToS. They claim Parler violated their ToS. They have a good case. I haven't seen Parler's rebuttal yet. Maybe it's a good one.

    Your sense of irony isn't relative to that. It only matters that Parler, according to Amazon's allegations, did not do anything to stop people from using their platform to incite violence and plan their insurrection. Maybe Parler did take steps. Maybe they didn't violate the ToS. We'll see.

    But if Parler gets shut down because of this, they would be the ones at fault if the allegations are true. Inciting violence and plotting insurrection is not protected speech. Amazon has every right to disallow that on the systems that use their services. And every user of their services is obligated to take steps to prevent it.


     
    Top Bottom