Pages

31 comments

Jump to bottom
1 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 1:45:04pm

As I tried to point out in the comments on your first post on this, it’s FATCA, not FACTA. “Fatcat” see, which should be a clue about the attitude of the wankers who come up with these rather disturbing moves towards cross border money grabbing.

“In addition, the new Protocol adopts provisions that enable the competent authorities to assist each other in the collection of taxes. The new Protocol also provides for the full exchange of information between the competent authorities to facilitate the administration of each country’s tax laws.”

In other words, if you have income or assets overseas, more and more foreign governments are being bullied into snitching to the IRS. No doubt dimwit lefties think this is a good thing, because the long term consequences of a world where it becomes impossible to hide anything from the government never occur to them.

2 FemNaziBitch  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 2:00:13pm

So, you see a world in which the Rich and the Elite get to have global citizenship, but the rank n’ file don’t is a good thing?

Did I forget to include corporations?

3 Varek Raith  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 2:03:29pm

re: #1 Barflytom

As I tried to point out in the comments on your first post on this, it’s FATCA, not FACTA. “Fatcat” see, which should be a clue about the attitude of the wankers who come up with these rather disturbing moves towards cross border money grabbing.

“In addition, the new Protocol adopts provisions that enable the competent authorities to assist each other in the collection of taxes. The new Protocol also provides for the full exchange of information between the competent authorities to facilitate the administration of each country’s tax laws.”

In other words, if you have income or assets overseas, more and more foreign governments are being bullied into snitching to the IRS. No doubt dimwit lefties think this is a good thing, because the long term consequences of a world where it becomes impossible to hide anything from the government never occur to them.

Oh shut up.
Most corps and 1%ers use these methods to dodge taxes. They are simply greedy and don’t give a shit about America, only their bottom line.

How patriotic of them!

4 FemNaziBitch  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 2:10:42pm

Do you think it would make the poster happy if I just admitted I can be a bad proofreader?

Or should I just come out and say that, at times, I can be an ignorant slut

whose vote counts?

5 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 2:55:12pm

re: #2 FemNaziBitch

So, you see a world in which the Rich and the Elite get to have global citizenship, but the rank n’ file don’t is a good thing?

Did I forget to include corporations?

Not sure what you mean by “global citizenship”, and you’re missing my point. If there were no tax havens of any kind, what incentive is there for governments to keep tax rates down ?

Some EU bigwig a few years ago used to go on about “harmful tax competition”, meaning that countries like Ireland with very low corporate tax rates were drawing investment from high tax countries. So, harmful to who ? The only people “harmed” are the big government mandarins who want to expand their own power.

There are other areas where supposedly benign international agreements are in practice a serious encroachment on individual liberty. Britain for example signed a horribly one-sided extradition treaty with the USA a few years ago, which was supposedly only going to be used against the most dangerous terrorists. It has since been used against bankers for example, who had committed no crime under their own country’s laws, but who faced 20 year sentences in the US for breach of some draconian regulation or other.

If you like the idea of the US government being able to grab you or your money anywhere in the world, then either you haven’t thought the thing through, or you’re afflicted with the common lefty assumption that bigger government is always going to be on your side.

6 Obdicut  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:13:26pm

re: #5 Barflytom

Not sure what you mean by “global citizenship”, and you’re missing my point. If there were no tax havens of any kind, what incentive is there for governments to keep tax rates down ?

The incentive that there should be; keeping tax rates at a level they don’t hinder the economy.

Some EU bigwig a few years ago used to go on about “harmful tax competition”, meaning that countries like Ireland with very low corporate tax rates were drawing investment from high tax countries. So, harmful to who ? The only people “harmed” are the big government mandarins who want to expand their own power.

It’s harmful because it becomes a race to the bottom, and turns the marketplace into a zero-sum game. The ideal situation would be roughly equal economic distribution, which would help spur competition and markets and all those other good capitalist things. Whenever capital gets concentrated, in capitalism, it is bad for capitalism. This is a simple concept that most people who think they’re pro-capitalist don’t get, because they’re not really pro-capitalist. Like you. The velocity of money is what is important.

Money that is taxed is not destroyed. It is almost immediately spent by the government, almost all of it in the local economy. Money given to corporations may be spent or may not be, and large amounts of it are funneled into profits for a small amount of people who, likewise, don’t spend it at the same rates as ordinary people do. So the velocity of money is slowed, and the economy suffers.

If you like the idea of the US government being able to grab you or your money anywhere in the world, then either you haven’t thought the thing through, or you’re afflicted with the common lefty assumption that bigger government is always going to be on your side.

The US government should be able to tax all money made by US citizens, because that’s the responsibility of citizenship. Tax-dodging is unpatriotic in the extreme, it’s theft from your fellow citizens.

7 EPR-radar  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:27:33pm

re: #5 Barflytom

So intergovernmental cooperation to go after tax havens is bad because:

1) governments need tax competition to keep rates low (So Somalia is the up and coming global finance/tech powerhouse?)

2) It allows government mandarins to expand their power. (Please spare me)

3) A US UK extradition treaty has allegedly been horribly abused. (And how exactly does this story, if true, justify foreign tax shelters?)

4) US government should be blind to all activities outside the US. (So any person or corporation wealthy enough to park income and assets overseas should pay no US taxes. That might be a hard sell, even to Fox News viewers.)

8 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 7:33:57pm

re: #6 Obdicut

You talk about corporations as if they were owned by aliens on some distant planet. Most large corporations are owned mostly by institutional investors - pension funds, mutual funds etc, in other words by average people saving for retirement.

“The US government should be able to tax all money made by US citizens, because that’s the responsibility of citizenship. Tax-dodging is unpatriotic in the extreme, it’s theft from your fellow citizens.”

As you ought to know, the US is one of very few countries to tax citizens on their worldwide incomes - Eritrea is another one. No doubt you are proud that your country is in such illustrious company…

[Link: en.wikipedia.org…]

And my idea of ‘theft from your fellow citizens’ is taking taxpayer money and giving it to your cronies at Solyndra and (insert endless list of people Obama wants to hand money out to here).

It’s all theory with you, isn’t it ? You never seem to look at the actual consequences of intrusive government.

9 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 8:04:49pm

re: #7 EPR-radar

So intergovernmental cooperation to go after tax havens is bad because:

1) governments need tax competition to keep rates low (So Somalia is the up and coming global finance/tech powerhouse?)

Well of course they do. Otherwise you’d get some asshole like Obama once in a while who thinks the optimum tax rate is about 100%. I was thinking of Hong Kong or Singapore rather than Somalia by the way - why do you lefties always go for the straw man thing, as if the only choice was between massive Obama style government or a wilderness

2) It allows government mandarins to expand their power. (Please spare me)

That should be obvious, even to you. Why do you think government departments constantly seek to expand their reach - and their budgets ? Do you think it’s altruism ? (Excuse me for a moment while I fall about laughing - you probably DO think that, don’t you?)

3) A US UK extradition treaty has allegedly been horribly abused. (And how exactly does this story, if true, justify foreign tax shelters?)

Yes, it’s true. And I didn’t mean it as a direct comparison with tax laws. The point is that once you agree to let government have more powers, they will be abused. Pretty much as certain as night following day.

4) US government should be blind to all activities outside the US. (So any person or corporation wealthy enough to park income and assets overseas should pay no US taxes. That might be a hard sell, even to Fox News viewers.)

I refer to my reply to Obdicut above. If you like the idea of the USA being in a very exclusive club along with Eritrea, well, good luck.

10 Obdicut  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 8:21:46pm

re: #8 Barflytom

You talk about corporations as if they were owned by aliens on some distant planet. Most large corporations are owned mostly by institutional investors - pension funds, mutual funds etc, in other words by average people saving for retirement.

Can you demonstrate this, please, instead of asserting it?

As you ought to know, the US is one of very few countries to tax citizens on their worldwide incomes - Eritrea is another one. No doubt you are proud that your country is in such illustrious company…

This is just a lie, and you can’t read your own wiki link:

In the residential system, residents of the country are taxed on their worldwide (local and foreign) income,

You are one of the worst debaters I’ve ever seen. And you probably think you’re awesome. Honestly, how could someone look at that Wiki article and not understand it? It even has a gigantic table that shows that residents in the UK are taxed on their worldwide income.

So if you haven’t been paying tax on your worldwide income, congrats, you’re a criminal.

11 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 9:15:14pm

re: #10 Obdicut

Can you demonstrate this, please, instead of asserting it?

I didn’t even bother looking it up, because that’s such a widely known fact - or so I thought.

Try this one, or research it yourself;

[Link: tcbblogs.org…]

Quote: “the report showed that institutional investors owned 73 percent of the top 1,000 companies in 2009”

This is just a lie, and you can’t read your own wiki link:

You are one of the worst debaters I’ve ever seen. And you probably think you’re awesome. Honestly, how could someone look at that Wiki article and not understand it? It even has a gigantic table that shows that residents in the UK are taxed on their worldwide income.

So if you haven’t been paying tax on your worldwide income, congrats, you’re a criminal.

Go to the bottom of the chart, and look at the countries which tax foreign income of non-resident citizens - the last column on the right. The only countries in that rather dubious club are the USA and Eritrea.

So, are we at least agreed on the basic facts now ?

12 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 9:26:37pm

re: #10 Obdicut

And btw, since I have a social life - something which is probably unknown to many of you lefties - I didn’t get around to replying to you the last time you called me a liar for a day or so.

See here..

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

As always, I look forward to your reply. ( It’s good to be reminded of the rather odd worldview you lefties have once in a while ).

13 Interesting Times  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 10:06:54pm

Oh look, the barfing bigot is back. I’ll just repeat what I said the last time he puked all over the site:

Reminder: Barfing tom is a filthy little anti-gay bigot who called gay US soldiers “buggers in battledress”. Don’t feed this particularly nasty and worthless troll.

And here are some examples of the soliders he’s slandering:

Tell: An Intimate History of Gay Men in the Military

When Alva signed up, before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” he had to lie on his paperwork. “I knew I was lying,” he says. “But I loved what I did, I loved my job, and I didn’t want to tell anyone. I said, ‘It’s going to be my secret.’ I knew I was not going to be happy in a way, but I knew this was what I wanted.” In 2003 he was deployed to the Middle East, and on March 21 he crossed the border from Kuwait. His unit was part of a huge convoy that stopped outside Basra. Alva got out of his Humvee and went to fetch something from the back of the vehicle. “That’s when I triggered the IED. I was awake, my hearing was sort of gone. My hand was covered in blood and part of my index finger was gone. The chaplain was holding my head and I was telling him I didn’t want to die. I was taken off a helicopter in Kuwait—it was estimated that I was only in Iraq about three hours—and carried into surgery. I woke up later and when I looked down I saw that the right side of my sheet was flat. I cried myself asleep, only to wake up hours later and see that it’s true: My leg is gone.”

As he recuperated, he learned about his inadvertent status. “I don’t know who designated me to be the first. I was never given a certificate or anything. One-millionth shopper. Now I have the dubious distinction of being the first American injured when the war started. It didn’t make it better or worse. I mean, my life was changed forever. I was angry that my leg was gone. Even when I was still in the hospital, hours would go by so slow, and I actually said to myself: ‘Who is going to love me now?’ I’d never really experienced dating anyone. ‘Who is going to love me now? I’m missing a leg.’

So, now that women are allowed to serve in combat roles, is the little bigot going to call them “bitches in battledress”? 9_9

14 Barflytom  Thu, Jan 24, 2013 10:34:16pm

re: #13 Interesting Times

A bit of a one-club golfer, aren’t you ?

15 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 2:24:20am

re: #11 Barflytom

Quote: “the report showed that institutional investors owned 73 percent of the top 1,000 companies in 2009”

So why are you assuming that institutional investors represent money from individuals invested with those institutions?

Go to the bottom of the chart, and look at the countries which tax foreign income of non-resident citizens - the last column on the right. The only countries in that rather dubious club are the USA and Eritrea.

Who gives a shit about non-resident citizens? Your claim was “As you ought to know, the US is one of very few countries to tax citizens on their worldwide incomes”. If you mean to say ‘non-resident citizens’, then sorry you fucked up, but that’s not really my problem is it?

16 Interesting Times  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 5:52:51am

re: #14 Barflytom

A bit of a one-club golfer, aren’t you ?

LOL. And I’m going to keep beating this little bigot over the head with it, just so everyone who happens to be reading knows what a worthless git he is, and why his argument is irrelevant.

17 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 5:55:39am

re: #16 Interesting Times

LOL. And I’m going to keep beating this little bigot over the head with it, just so everyone who happens to be reading knows what a worthless git he is, and why his argument is irrelevant.

His being a cowardly bigot doesn’t invalidate his economic stuff. His ignorance about economics and failure to be able to form anything approaching a coherent argument does.

18 Barflytom  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 8:33:17am

re: #15 Obdicut

So why are you assuming that institutional investors represent money from individuals invested with those institutions?

Who else’s money would it represent ? Martians ?
Whether those institutional investors are pension funds, banks, hedge funds or whatever, the money ultimately belongs to some individual somewhere, whether it’s someone with a pension or a shareholder in a bank or other corporation. The only exceptions would be college endowments, charitable trusts and suchlike, and I doubt that they account for enough of that 73% to make my point invalid.

Who gives a shit about non-resident citizens?

Apparently the IRS does, not to mention non-resident citizens themselves. That would include Americans working abroad who can no longer open a bank account in a foreign country.

Your claim was “As you ought to know, the US is one of very few countries to tax citizens on their worldwide incomes”. If you mean to say ‘non-resident citizens’, then sorry you fucked up, but that’s not really my problem is it?

Yes, I should have said “non-resident citizens”. I thought it was fairly obvious from the chart what point I was making, but I forgot about your fondness for hair-splitting.

You’re avoiding the main issue, which is that the USA does more to inconvenience its own citizens than almost any other supposedly free country.

19 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 8:46:32am

re: #18 Barflytom

Who else’s money would it represent ? Martians ?

It might represent the money of other corporations, for examples, or of very wealthy individuals. Wealth has been increasingly concentrated in a smaller number of hands; pretending this isn’t true isn’t really going to work.

I can see you’re not going to provide anything remotely resembling proof.

Whether those institutional investors are pension funds, banks, hedge funds or whatever, the money ultimately belongs to some individual somewhere, whether it’s someone with a pension or a shareholder in a bank or other corporation. The only exceptions would be college endowments, charitable trusts and suchlike, and I doubt that they account for enough of that 73% to make my point invalid.

Yeah, some individual. It doesn’t mean it’s owned by ‘average’ individuals, which was your claim. You can’t back up that claim.

Yes, I should have said “non-resident citizens”. I thought it was fairly obvious from the chart what point I was making, but I forgot about your fondness for hair-splitting.

And I thought you were just being either stupid or duplicitious, since that’s the usual from you. But why were you trying to make a point about non-resident citizens? Who gives a shit about non-resident citizens (beyond the specialized case of the military and civil service personnel?)

You’re avoiding the main issue, which is that the USA does more to inconvenience its own citizens than almost any other supposedly free country.

Whops, there you go again, claiming this is about citizens and not non-resident citizens.

Man, you have a weird problem with that. It’s almost like your argument is so weak you have to keep trying to assert untruths to make it palatable.

The US and the UK both tax citizens foreign income. In the corner case of non-resident citizens, the US taxes while the UK doesn’t. It has fuck-all to do with the average citizen.

20 Barflytom  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 8:58:15am

re: #16 Interesting Times

The issue is whether the military should be forced accomodate a small, but rather loud minority, against the overall best interest of the country.

If you allow homosexuals to serve in the military, you’re increasing the pool of potential recruits by about 3%, but probably pissing off about another 20% (at least) of the active military who don’t want to serve alongside them. That’s the figure in the last survey I can remember seeing.

Southerners and blacks for example are much more important demographics for military recruitment, and neither of those groups are exactly famous for their fondness for the fudge-packing community, are they ?

And are these fearless warriors really unable to deal with being referred to as “buggers” ?

And btw, I don’t really have a strong opinion one way or the other about gays - the second person I hired over here was a lesbo (and rather a cute one too…)*. I just don’t see why institutions which have existed for centuries should be forced to change solely for the benefit of a small minority.

*Now you can call me a mysogynist as well as a bigot ! Or you could just get yourself a life instead….

21 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 8:59:38am

re: #20 Barflytom

Homosexuals have always served in the military.

22 Barflytom  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:08:39am

re: #19 Obdicut

You replied to everything except the point about Americans working abroad, not all of whom are military or civil service. Must be nice to be told that you can’t open a bank account in London now because your government are a bunch of assholes.

It’s not a trivial matter; it shows the underlying attitude of the government towards its citizens.

23 Barflytom  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:13:34am

re: #21 Obdicut

Homosexuals have always served in the military.

Well, yeah. And rather a lot of them in the Britsh army for example !

I left out the word “openly”, and you omitted to explain why it’s a good idea to let them in.

24 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:16:32am

re: #22 Barflytom

You replied to everything except the point about Americans working abroad, not all of whom are military or civil service. Must be nice to be told that you can’t open a bank account in London now because your government are a bunch of assholes.

Why do you think you can’t open a bank account in London?

It’s not a trivial matter; it shows the underlying attitude of the government towards its citizens.

Then why doesn’t all the other countries that likewise tax foreign income for their citizens show the same thing?

25 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:20:11am

re: #23 Barflytom

Well, yeah. And rather a lot of them in the Britsh army for example !

I left out the word “openly”, and you omitted to explain why it’s a good idea to let them in.

Again, you don’t have to ‘let them in’, they’re already there. What you mean is ‘why isn’t a good idea to honestly acknowledge gay people are in the military and stop pretending they’re not and trying to kick them out’, and that question is kind of obviously answered on the face of it.

The sexuality of the soldier next to you shouldn’t matter. The idea that the recruitment pool will dry up is idiotic and disproved by every other first-world nation. Your blanket condemnation of Southerners and blacks as bigots must be comforting to you, but it’s still fatuous.

Can you cite a drop in military enlistment, post DADT being shot down? According to you, you should be able to. So hop to it.

And I know you like saying tons of stupidly offensive shit because you think it’ll rile people up, but it just makes you look pathetic. It doesn’t even bug me, any more than a guy screaming ‘faggot’ out the window of his trans-am does. It’s just the bray of a jackass.

26 Barflytom  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:28:43am

re: #24 Obdicut

Why do you think you can’t open a bank account in London?

We already covered that. A lot of financial institutions won’t accept US citizens or even green card holders as clients unless they have about half a million in funds. The reporting requirements are now so onerous that it simply isn’t worth the trouble.

Look it up yourself.

27 Obdicut  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 9:33:50am

re: #26 Barflytom

We already covered that. A lot of financial institutions won’t accept US citizens or even green card holders as clients unless they have about half a million in funds. The reporting requirements are now so onerous that it simply isn’t worth the trouble.

Ah, so you were just saying something that wasn’t true again, hyperbolically, because reality doesn’t support your point.

28 Charles Johnson  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 10:46:04am

re: #26 Barflytom

After all the ugly anti-gay slurs you’ve spewed in this thread, your account is history. Bye now. Have fun at Free Republic.

29 EPR-radar  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 1:04:19pm

re: #28 Charles Johnson

Thanks for taking out the trash.

30 FemNaziBitch  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 1:18:22pm

Well, Obdi, EPR-radar and Charles, Thank you for taking care of the trash. I also appreciate the economics lesson.

I’m inclined to continue to misspell the acronym, but that would be snarky, wouldn’t it?

As everyone knows, I’m not the detail-oriented type. It seems to me that regardless of the “reduce taxes here” argument, Those that can have always sequestered their money away in off-shore accounts —no?

Either to escape taxes or to secure a place to live if their own country becomes unsafe. With all the bruhaha over “raising the tax on the rich” it seems we be in better shape if we collect the taxes already owed by the 1%.

Otherwise the middle-class will get squeezed even more. Not for wasteful government spending but for government programs we desperately need.

Infrastructure anyone?

31 TedStriker  Fri, Jan 25, 2013 2:52:50pm

re: #20 Barflytom

Enjoy your permanent LGF vacation, you bigoted shitbird. IMO, this was far overdue, but as they say, sometimes you just need to give someone enough rope to hang themselves.

/don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

TwitterFacebook

Turn off all ads for a full year by subscribing!
For about 33 cents a day (per month) or 22 cents a day (per year), our subscription option turns off all advertisements at LGF!
Read more...

► LGF Headlines

  • Loading...

► Tweeted Articles

  • Loading...

► Tweeted Pages

  • Loading...

► Top 10 Comments

  • Loading...

► Bottom Comments

  • Loading...

► Recent Comments

  • Loading...

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form
LGF Pages

This button leads to the main index of LGF Pages, our user-submitted articles. You can post your own LGF Pages simply by registering a free account with us.

Create a Page

This is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.

Last updated: 2014-03-07 2:19 pm PST

LGF User's Guide
Recent Pages
Randall Gross
Russia ‘Outraged’ at Deadly Shootout in East Ukraine
Four people were reported killed on Sunday in a gun battle in restive eastern Ukraine, shattering a fragile Easter truce in the crisis-hit former Soviet republic. Three pro-Russian militants and one attacker were killed in a deadly firefight at a road block close to the separatist-held town of Slavyansk, local leader Vyatcheslav Ponomarev said. The identity of the assailants was not known. Kiev's ...

1 hour, 20 minutes ago
Views: 59 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 0
FemNaziBitch
‘MOM BABY GOD’ Offers Outsider’s Inside View of Pro-Life Movement : The (402)/411
"It always comes back to God in the end," Burrows said of pro-life efforts. "They try to rebrand themselves as focusing on women's rights, but it really comes down to reinforcing conservative Christian values and pushing it on people." She tried to understand the pro-life movement from the perspective of other young women. Burrows said she could see why they were persuaded by ...

15 hours ago
Views: 138 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 1 • Rating: 1
palmerskiss
Debate Discrimination - Houston Chronicle
We're glad to see Mayor Annise Parker finally stand up and propose a human rights commission that will provide local due process for victims of public discrimination. Parker told the Chronicle editorial board that she plans to release a formal version of her proposal within the next few weeks, but sometimes the process is just as important as the result. As the energy ...

16 hours, 44 minutes ago
Views: 94 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 0
cycroft
Russ Campbell’s Blog: Bill C-23, Fair Elections Act Seems Now on Solid Ground
Now that a Sen­ate com­mit­tee has rec­om­mended nine changes to Bill C-23, Fair Elec­tions Act, the leg­is­la­tion seems pretty solid. And, since Pierre Poilievre has, ap­par­ently, in­di­cated pri­vately that he's open to changes, an amended ver­sion of the bill will likely be­come law by this sum­mer. We would prob­a­bly have got­ten to this point ear­lier had not the min­is­ter re­spon­si­ble for the bill ...

19 hours, 14 minutes ago
Views: 73 • Comments: 1
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 0
MichaelJ
Live now - 2014 Rip Curl Pro Bells Beach - ASP World Tour
More: 2014 Rip Curl Pro Bells Beach - ASP Iconic Bells Beach in Victoria, Australia once again hosts the world's best surfers for the 41st running of the Bells Beach Contest. New feature in this broadcast: drone cam!

1 day, 15 hours ago
Views: 180 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 3 • Rating: 0
Skip Intro
Why the Temperature of the Yellow Sea Is a Big Deal, and Other Questions About the South Korean Ferry Disaster
The boat ran into trouble several dozen miles from Jindo, an island that sticks out of South Korea's southwestern corner like a little toe. Jindo is surrounded by a group of even smaller islands that are slightly farther afield from the mainland. The ferry was curving around those small islands at the time it issued a distress call. What caused the disaster? We ...

1 day, 20 hours ago
Views: 349 • Comments: 3
Tweets: 25 • Rating: 1
Idle Drifter
Calgary stabbings: How knife crime in Canada can cause ‘moral panic’
What Calgary police chief Rick Hanson called the "worst mass murder" in the city's history didn't end at the barrel of a gun. Instead, the 22-year-old suspect identified on Tuesday as Matthew de Grood is accused of entering the kitchen at a house party, taking "a large knife" and using it to fatally stab four men and one woman, all of whom were students ...

3 days, 6 hours ago
Views: 241 • Comments: 4
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 0
aagcobb
New York Electoral College: State Joins National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Ben Mathis-Lilley, Slate: New York Electoral College: State Joins National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Instead of pushing for a Constitutional amendment, which would have to be ratified in 38 states, advocates ask individual state legislatures to pass an agreement: that they'll pledge all their presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote as soon as enough other states pass the law to ...

3 days, 13 hours ago
Views: 249 • Comments: 7
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 2
Political Atheist
The Insane History of Rockets at Jet Propulsion Laboratories
The Rocket Boys In the late 1930s, a group of Caltech graduate students were booted off campus after blowing up (part of!) their building during a rocket test gone awry. Unwilling to give up on the joy of semi-controlled explosions, the students and a few of their friends headed into the San Gabriel Mountains. They picked a deserted gully -- Arroyo Seco -- ...

4 days, 10 hours ago
Views: 282 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 2
iossarian
Drug Companies Want Your Money
Two thematically-related stories on the BBC at the moment: UK drug company Glaxo 'paid bribes to Polish doctors' UK drug company GlaxoSmithKline is facing a criminal investigation in Poland for allegedly bribing doctors, BBC Panorama has discovered. Tamiflu: Millions wasted on flu drug, claims major report Hundreds of millions of pounds may have been wasted on a drug for flu that works no better ...

4 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 277 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 8 • Rating: 0
 Frank says:

Anyone who is disturbed by the idea of newts in a nightclub is potentially dangerous.