The plaintiffs’ arguments in Moore v. United States have little basis in law — unless you think that a list of long-ago-discarded laissez-faire decisions from the early 20th century remain good law. And a decision favoring these plaintiffs could blow a huge hole in the federal budget. While no Warren-style wealth tax is on the books, the Moore plaintiffs do challenge an existing tax that is expected to raise $340 billion over the course of a decade.
But Republicans also hold six seats on the nation’s highest Court, so there is some risk that a majority of the justices will accept the plaintiffs’ dubious legal arguments. And if they do so, they could do considerable damage to the government’s ability to fund itself.
@spaceghoti
biased and not very objective article
whether a tax will alleviate a budget crisis is not a good argument
like saying mass executions would reduce inflation
I’m sorry. Is it biased because you don’t agree with it, or because you didn’t read it to see how they’re sourcing their information?
@spaceghoti
it is obvious from the first few sentences that the publication is trying to propagandize the reader rather than inform them
on the face of it, I would disagree with it but those first few sentences betrayed it
Ah, it doesn’t fit your ideological bias, therefore it must not be worth reading. Understood.
Not everyone who disagrees with you is attacking you.
I’m not assuming I’m being attacked. The utter lack of anything concrete in the criticism of the article suggests that the commenter is offended by the topic and possibly the source. I was just clarifying the nature of their objection.
To be fair, it’s pretty silly to throw out the entire article’s merits on a few bias statements.
Very few articles are completely without bias.
Like it really just sounds like perfect brains is trying to discard the argument just because they don’t wanna hear it.
@AnonTwo @spaceghoti @NoIWontPickaName
for anyone who understands standard essay form,
the first few sentences must lay out the writers basic points
this is just a political propaganda piece
I mean, I could say you’re bias to the article too, and that’d be as much concrete argument as you’re giving here.
Go into detail.
@AnonTwo @spaceghoti @NoIWontPickaName
sounds like I am doing all the heavy lifting
look at the first paragraph,
which sentences are meat and which are fat?
I request to stop being tagged please.
IDC enough about this.
@NoIWontPickaName @spaceghoti @AnonTwo
@NoIWontPickaName @spaceghoti
such a truism is not worth uttering
@spaceghoti
amazing how you jump to your own conclusion not mine