I've never actually bought a playboy. My dad used to read them, but he was such a classy gentleman you could actually believe he was reading them for the articles.

55 pages is rather excessive. I mean even if he was considered "the sexiest dictator" (Putin style)...55 pages is too much. I mean playboy magazines don't even have 55 page spreads, and that's a porn magazine.

My main question is does N. Korea know all this happened?

It's all prefabbed, why worry when all you have to do is assemble a jigsaw puzzle?

Collapsing replies should be implemented imo. Comments can have tons of replies and sometimes I just want to get to the next reply and skip the thread.

P.S.

love the site.

Sometimes it's important in a democracy or republic to have a 'fair' tax. If you tax by efficiency you can end up with an 'unfair' tax. Remember any change to a government has to be brought about by the people; directly or indirectly. If you ask the people who they want to tax they will say the rich, because the rich are outnumbered 10 to 1 in even the most prosperous parts of the country. I don't think it's fair to let popular vote decide anything because you end up with a large minority being unsatisfied (see "Tyranny of the Majority").

Flat tax doesn't really work either. It taxes all people equally, but not all people are equal, at least economically. 10% to someone who earns $100 is a lot more in terms of buying power than 10% to someone who earns $1000.

Consumption tax can work in the U.S. It did for over a hundred years before income tax was introduced. I think of it in terms of how people are disciplined. Negative reinforcement only encourages them to avoid getting caught. Positive enforcement is great in concept but how do you put that into a tax system? Not possible, so like I stated before tax based on who deserves it? People avoid taxes by finding loopholes or plain lying. How do you lie to a consumption tax? The only thing I can think of is black markets, but a black market for most things already exists and doesn't really threaten legal sales (i.e. piracy, bootlegs). If people don't want to pay the tax they can't get the goods.

Why tax for success? The opposite is also true, why tax for failure? Since there really is no true way to tax without some sort of negativity, why not tax based on who deserves to be taxed. The question becomes even more complex. Who does deserve it? Many ways to decide this, but then people argue over who deserves to be taxed the most. I believe if you spend money you deserve to be taxed. Why? No real reason other than it is easy to avoid this tax, just stop spending. Now, keep the sales tax the way it is, food and clothing being untaxed, but raise taxes to say 10 percent. This tax does two things it allows people to avoid tax at the consequence of not benefiting from the economy, or spend and be taxed.

I try to think of technology that will someday out match me. So far in life I have been able to adapt, but one day the technology will become useless to me or even worse I will be unable to use it. The technology gap is wide, but I've noticed it is wider between the newer generation and the middle aged then the new and the old old generations. This has been true for thousands of years, but I honestly expected it to change as soon as technology started to exponentially grow.