Working Press
The American Prospect
Arena
Capital & Main
Chalkbeat NYC
The City
Common Dreams
The Conversation
The Daily Yonder
Cory Doctorow
Digby's Hullabaloo
Dissent
Drop Site News
Gothamist
Grist
The Guardian US, UK, AU
Hakai
The Hollywood Reporter
In These Times
The Indypendent
Inequality.org
The Intercept
Jacobin
KFF Health News
Knowable
Labor Notes
The Marginalian
The Marshall Project
Michael Hudson
Middle East Eye
Minnesota Reformer
Mother Jones
The Narwhal
New Left Review
New York Focus
Noéma
NOTUS
ProPublica
Psyche
This
Variety
The Village Voice
Vox
Zócalo Public Square
+972
Podcasts
The Majority Report with Sam Seder*
Owen Jones
Second Thought
Nota bene
Electronic Frontier Foundation
List of publications and their leanings
Livestream nature
NYT Connections Archive & Creation Tool**
NYT Wordle Cheat
Right to Repair
Science Fiction Roundups
Useful
Acronym Finder
Electricity Calculator
Judicial Review Tool NYC
Progressive Talent Pipeline
Scaffolding Map NYC
Women's Press Collective
Actually Funny YouTube Channels
Bobby Fingers
Chris Kohler News
CinemaSins
Dark Brandon
Elephant Graveyard
*Arthur Goldwag interview 27 June 2024 / Corporate control of the government 19 August 2024
**"Only Connect…" by Howard Send #1, #2
7 notes
·
View notes
Player One, Player Two: As the years go by..
𝘈 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘴, 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘻𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴, 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘴. 𝘊𝘩𝘰 𝘠/𝘕 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭, 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘢𝘪𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦. 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘴 𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴, 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘶𝘥𝘥𝘺, 𝘒𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘛𝘢𝘦𝘩𝘺𝘶𝘯. 𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘨𝘢𝘨𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘰𝘶𝘵... 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵?
Prev / Masterlist
A/N: its over!! thanks for everyone for going on this journey with me! if you liked what you read, please check out my other works!
P1P2 Taglist: @cecedrake2217 @rencarnationofangel @alyssajavenss @mintxts
Permanent Taglist (open): @junnmizz @ashxxgyu @igotkpoops @xiaoderrrr @alyssajavenss @mintxts<3
16 notes
·
View notes
p1p2
。。奥地利格洛克17型手枪爆射
p3p4
Don't hurt yourself
You don't need your body
Give me
I want your body, Let me fuck fuck
我要你身体,让我超超
65 notes
·
View notes
man this deck is so sweet. i got p1p8 builders talent after i was pretty sure i wanted to be some sort of RGx control deck (p1p1 season and p1p2 hugs, though i thought it would be RGb because i picked up a few good black removal spells) and didn't see another one but things are working out (2-0 rn)
2 notes
·
View notes
How we let them become richer than God
With the costs of the Civil War looming, Congress imposed a national income tax in 1861. The wealthy helped force its repeal soon after the war ended. (Their pique could only have been exacerbated by the fact that the law required public disclosure. The annual income of the moguls of the day — $1.3 million for William Astor; $576,000 for Cornelius Vanderbilt — was listed in the pages of The New York Times in 1865.)
By the late 19th and early 20th century, wealth inequality was acute and the political climate was changing. The federal government began expanding, creating agencies to protect food, workers and more. It needed funding, but tariffs were pinching regular Americans more than the rich. The Supreme Court had rejected an 1894 law that would have created an income tax. So Congress moved to amend the Constitution. The 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913 and gave the government power “to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived.”
In the early years, the personal income tax worked as Congress intended, falling squarely on the richest. In 1918, only 15% of American families owed any tax. The top 1% paid 80% of the revenue raised, according to historian W. Elliot Brownlee.
But a question remained: What would count as income and what wouldn’t? In 1916, a woman named Myrtle Macomber received a dividend for her Standard Oil of California shares. She owed taxes, thanks to the new law. The dividend had not come in cash, however. It came in the form of an additional share for every two shares she already held. She paid the taxes and then brought a court challenge: Yes, she’d gotten a bit richer, but she hadn’t received any money. Therefore, she argued, she’d received no “income.”
Four years later, the Supreme Court agreed. In Eisner v. Macomber, the high court ruled that income derived only from proceeds. A person needed to sell an asset — stock, bond or building — and reap some money before it could be taxed.
Since then, the concept that income comes only from proceeds — when gains are “realized” — has been the bedrock of the U.S. tax system. Wages are taxed. Cash dividends are taxed. Gains from selling assets are taxed. But if a taxpayer hasn’t sold anything, there is no income and therefore no tax.
Contemporary critics of Macomber were plentiful and prescient. Cordell Hull, the congressman known as the “father” of the income tax, assailed the decision, according to scholar Marjorie Kornhauser. Hull predicted that tax avoidance would become common. The ruling opened a gaping loophole, Hull warned, allowing industrialists to build a company and borrow against the stock to pay living expenses. Anyone could “live upon the value” of their company stock “without selling it, and of course, without ever paying” tax, he said.
Hull’s prediction would reach full flower only decades later, spurred by a series of epochal economic, legal and cultural changes that began to gather momentum in the 1970s. Antitrust enforcers increasingly accepted mergers and stopped trying to break up huge corporations. For their part, companies came to obsess over the value of their stock to the exclusion of nearly everything else. That helped give rise in the last 40 years to a series of corporate monoliths — beginning with Microsoft and Oracle in the 1980s and 1990s and continuing to Amazon, Google, Facebook and Apple today — that often have concentrated ownership, high profit margins and rich share prices. The winner-take-all economy has created modern fortunes that by some measures eclipse those of John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie.
0 notes
Player One, Player Two: 18. secret child
𝘈 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘴, 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘻𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴, 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘴. 𝘊𝘩𝘰 𝘠/𝘕 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭, 𝘢𝘸𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘢𝘪𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦. 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘴 𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴, 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘶𝘥𝘥𝘺, 𝘒𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘛𝘢𝘦𝘩𝘺𝘶𝘯. 𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘨𝘢𝘨𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘰𝘶𝘵... 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵?
Prev / Masterlist / Next
If you like what you read, please consider reblogging so that this smau can reach more people <3
I’d also love to hear your thoughts <3 comments, dms, asks, all so so appreciated <3
POLL FOR NEXT SMAU (posted april 19,2023)
P1P2 Taglist is open! DM, send an ask, or leave a comment asking to join, and I will add you!
P1P2 Taglist: @cecedrake2217 @rencarnationofangel @alyssajavenss @mintxts
Permanent Taglist (open): @junnmizz @ashxxgyu @igotkpoops @xiaoderrrr @alyssajavenss @mintxts<3
20 notes
·
View notes
给自己做的饭把
P1P2灵感来自uriver38 太太的小红帽,童话系列(?灰姑娘。
3 notes
·
View notes
发点东西!
P1P2是danniel♀!很可爱的眼镜宝宝www
P3是另外两个眼镜宝宝呀!都是特别可爱的。。。(´∀`)
P4捏造了一点幼儿园设定。。。walter园长和他的小朋友们!グッ!(๑•̀ㅂ•́)و✧
P5确实是kai,只是顺手加了眼镜。。。我真的很喜欢眼镜(*´╰╯`๓)
P6文字:toko说得对,我也想看xolga穿超短裙
P7是asutin和xolga呀!我平常很喜欢画小纸片耶耶耶耶
P8是xolga小娃娃!虽然是可以换衣服的结构,但我要毕业了所以送给同学了,因此我并没有来得及制作它的可替换服装(T▽T)
P9是xolga和toko!灵感来自我的班长呀!用短裤边边给小娃娃盖被子真的很可爱(;∀;)
0 notes