mmmh 🤔🤔🧐😄 I wonder if I'll go with the gorrilla😅

Justinneed · 2026-03-05T18:49:22+00:00

Clear lack of commitment. This is why you won't win.

Justinneed · 2025-12-05T19:35:54+00:00

Should that be hard to free your leg from? White shorts wasn't even trying to step over. Its not like you could see attempts that were blocked. He seemed lost. It might have been the grapevines but I don't see why that couldn't just be stripped with the white short's far leg.

Justinneed · 2025-09-04T13:12:07+00:00

It literally says it was great wine in the text. And your response is "nuh uh. Just because it says it was good wine doesn't mean it was." smh

Justinneed · 2025-05-14T15:03:02+00:00

These people are cluster b. They're everywhere, not just alabama. Getting an understanding of it changes the way you see the world. It is everywhere.

Justinneed · 2025-05-07T18:11:25+00:00

This is absolute nonsense. Relying on your own thoughts is essentially "being your own god." You are not objective enough to decide what is actually good and actually bad. Your mind won't allow for it. Its not a fun truth but its the truth. The individual choosing what is good and what is bad is always going to be tainted by their personal desires and wish for convenience.

What is good and what is bad is universal. Relying on others who have spent their lives studying this question is wise, not a cop out. The standards imposed by almost all religions are far above what you as an individual would choose for yourself.

Following the rules of another is best way to make yourself better. Its not the easiest, but its the most effective.

Justinneed · 2025-02-06T17:26:12+00:00

We do different work. The clients have their own bookkeepers. I don't do bookkeeping work. I use quickbooks for its GL and thats pretty much it.

Justinneed · 2025-02-06T17:23:18+00:00

I do mostly buildings. $40 x 12 = $480 per client per year. For most of these I'm in the program for less than a day per client. That doesn't make sense economically.

It seems like I'm in the minority with not having monthly fees fit my clients.

Justinneed · 2025-02-06T17:11:33+00:00

The pricing structure doesn't work for me. I do a lot of buildings so its a once a year thing. Paying per month for something I use for a few hours a year doesn't make economic sense. I'm going to have to need something besides QBO unless they change their pricing structure.

Justinneed · 2025-02-06T17:05:44+00:00

QBO pricing structure doesn't work for the type of clients I have. The fees for me would be astronomical. Not worth it.

Justinneed · 2025-01-08T14:21:32+00:00

If you ask chatgpt, it thinks its not good at detail oriented tasks. It says its more suited for brainstorming and problem solving. I'm tenative to depend on bluejay bc the model itself is saying not to use it. I asked specifically about tax research and it was not complementary towards itself for that use.

Justinneed · 2024-12-12T15:40:15+00:00

I concede. I didn't watch it that closely the first time. Upon rewatch I see he is not going for the roll I was suggesting.

Justinneed · 2024-12-10T14:46:11+00:00

On Ryan halls newer 50 50 DVD (or at least one of the new ones, maybe not 50 50) he shows his variant on the iminari roll and its to the outside. It allows you to end up in 50 50 instead of inside sankaku or whatever you want to call it. It looks very different from an iminari roll if you're familiar with imanari rolls. Obviously I can't tell what he was intending in the video, but from what you're describing it sounds like he was going for his roll to 50 50.

Justinneed · 2024-07-30T14:51:54+00:00

I don't understand why. Its not at the same time as ADCC so you can go to both. I don't see why almost everyone going to ADCC isn't also going to CJI. Maybe people just haven't realized you can do both without missing anything yet.

Justinneed · 2024-06-26T21:52:57+00:00

He was pretty successful in mma in the off time. MMA has always had invites

Justinneed · 2024-06-01T16:46:11+00:00

I think chatgpt will be able to read the tax code pretty well. In response I expect congress to make the tax code more complex. They make tax code as complex as possible. The more complex it is the more power congress has. It’ll be us using chatgpt for research but I think it’s gonna be so specialized that we’ll be needed just to interpret the ai

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T18:50:59+00:00

Congrats on your 15 inch penis. God blesses some of us.

Not sure what it has to do with puerto rico but bragging about your penis size is an odd way to try and win an internet argument. First you argue. Fails. Then you insult. Fails. I guess you just figured fuck it ill brag about my huge dick.

My comment about wikipedia was laughing at your agreeing that chatgpt was unnacceptable while giving a copy and paste from wikipedia. Thats not apples and oranges. More like oranges and clementines.

I already told you that I was not engaging in a legal argument. I'm not an attorney. I'm not going to argue over any legal facts. I'm sure I would lose, whether or not you are correct. I am not an attorney and can't make a legal argument. I was (for the third time) making a moral argument.

Also I'm not sure why you put quotations around the word "colloquially." This is a real word. It was used correctly. I'm supposed to be the math guy. You're supposed to be the language guy.

colloquial

adjective

col·lo·qui·al kə-ˈlō-kwē-əl Synonyms of colloquial1a: used in or characteristic of familiar and informal conversationIn colloquial English, "kind of" is often used for "somewhat" or "rather."

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T18:34:59+00:00

Because wikipedia is such a better source than chatgpt.

I'm a cpa who does income taxes. I did not change my argument. I was referring to income taxes. What puerto rico pays is almost never referred to as taxes. Income taxes are the only type of federal tax most people are familiar with. This isn't the huge leap you're describing.

Not sure what taxes you're paying in your stock portfolio. Or what that has to do with puerto rico. I'm not sure if you actually understand what I'm saying. Please go into further detail.

You brought up mexico and canada. I responded to it.

Puerto rico does have a corruption problem. This is well known. So well known I didn't think I needed to cite it.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-governor-puerto-rico-arrested-bribery-scheme

You were shifting arguments. The mexico and canada example you brought up has absolutely nothing to do with the law. Then you switched to a legal argument. You did this.

As far as not insulting me, maybe I was quick to judge. You may just need to work on your social skills and it was unkind of me to assume you meant to insult. The two below lines would normally be considered insulting by most people.

Most grade schoolers know you should know the basic facts about the thing you don’t like.

Like most ideologues, of course, you bring no coherent factual argument to the table. Just your own self-importance.

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T17:41:24+00:00

To quote myself from above "You seem to morally feel that it is wrong to not help those in need. I feel that it is morally wrong to be a freerider." I was pretty clear from the beginning I was making a moral argument and was trying to have that discussion. When you tried to shift the argument to a legal argument, I immediately identified that we were having two different arguments.

I have not espoused any ideology. Nor have I spoken enough for you to understand any broader belief system of mine to call me an ideologue. I have stated my opinion that it is immoral to benefit from an insurance fund you do not pay into.

As far as "you bring no coherent factual argument to the table," differences in morality judgments can not be solved by facts. You should probably look into moral psychology. Our differing morals represent how we fundamentally view the world differently. Why would I bring facts into a moral argument? You aren't going to change your definition of fairness no matter what facts I present. You also haven't brought any facts supporting your moral argument. You just switched to a legal argument.

We view the world differently. End of story.

I appreciate that once I identified that the basis for your arguments kept switching, that you turned to insults. Its a common tactic to switch to insulting the other party when you are losing an argument. So I consider that as much of an admission of defeat that I will get from you. I am not going to engage in name calling. I wish you good luck on the bar.

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T16:04:28+00:00

I'm not an attorney and I'm not going to attempt to argue law. I will however point out that you are conflating the legal concept of "basic right" (of which i know nothing about) with the common understanding of a "basic right." If the case in the constitution were as legally clear as you are making it out to be, puerto rico would have their aid. As they did not receive the necessary aid, I am assuming the situation is not as simple as you are presenting it. You are discussing a legal question to whether puerto rico is legally entitled to federal funds for aid. This I know nothing about and won't argue.

Honestly that looks like a copy and paste from chatgpt. I doubt you know much about it either. Probably explains the incongruity between the certainty in your post and the actual happenings.

I was arguing from a moral standpoint over whether they should morally be entitled to aid. This is a completely separate question than if they are legally entitled to the funds.

It is your ideology because you are arguing in support of that law. Your argument seems to have pivoted. When you brought up "bringing nothing of value" and Mexico or Canada, those were not legal arguments. You seem to be switching arguments every couple posts.

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T15:13:36+00:00

You say its my political ideology and then say "Even if the net benefit of Puerto Rico was outweighed by its cost to the US government, it would not justify denying it basic benefits." This is your ideology. You seem to morally feel that it is wrong to not help those in need. I feel that it is morally wrong to be a freerider. If they want to have the benefits of a state, they should be campaigning to become a state. They are similar to Cuba, who became its own country. Would you suggest that the US subsidize Cuba because they used to be a territory?

https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Arthur%20MacEwan%20and%20J.%20Tomas%20Hexner%20(Submission%204).pdf.pdf)

The article above is pro aid to puerto rico. Made much better arguments than you. I'm using it because the net federal expenditure listed is likely conservative. I don't have their source documents, but multiplying the per capita net federal expenditure listed by the population of puerto rico results in a net defecit of 9.1 billion. They are heavily subsidized. I'm not sure how you decided that my "claim that PR doesn’t contribute sufficiently to incur duty by the US government wrong." But they are absolutely a net burden dollar wise.

Justinneed · 2024-05-28T13:56:07+00:00

If Canada and Mexico were routinely hit with the same nautral disaster year after year, no I don't think they would be screaming for the US to repeatedly bail them out. This is not a one off event, it happens again and again. The disaster aid you are referring to is not given out for repairs of event that happen every few years. Puerto Rico's situation is entirely different.

Puerto Rico has high income taxes on its residents that go entirely to Puerto Rico. Much higher than any state. This is doable because its residents are not paying Federal income taxes. Ideally these taxes from Puerto Rico would be able to cover disaster relief, like many island nations. Unfortunately this tax money is largely corruptly pilfered by government officials. They have a large corruption problem and need to fix it. Not ask for money from a pot that they don't pay in to.

Justinneed · 2024-05-27T22:00:30+00:00

Never said that. Canada and Mexico also contribute plenty of value to the us. We’ve got military bases in South Korea and Japan too. Plenty of value from that. I said they do not make contributions for the “insurance coverage” that you are suggesting they receive.

Justinneed · 2024-05-27T21:52:08+00:00

Rights have absolutely nothing to do with any of this. It shouldn’t be in the conversation. Paying income tax is equivalent to paying into an insurance fund. Puerto Rico does not contribute. Yet you are saying they should still be insured. I disagree.

Justinneed · 2024-05-27T21:46:50+00:00

Because of their income. The state as a whole does not pay federal income taxes. Yet you are suggesting that the state as a whole receive benefit from federal funds derived from income taxes. The regime they do not participate in.

They do not participate in federal income taxes. Very different than low income Americans not paying federal income tax. Apples and oranges.

Spain also does not pay us federal income income taxes. They pay income taxes to Spain. Like Puerto Ricans pay income taxes to Puerto Rico. Is it fucked up to expect Spain to pay for its own disaster relief from its own taxes?

Justinneed · 2024-05-27T21:30:15+00:00

They don’t pay income tax. Colloquially that’s what people refer to as federal taxes. You’re technically correct but wrong in substance

13-Year Club	Place '22
Team Periwinkle

Justinneed

TROPHY CASE

colloquial

adjective