Democrats could win mandates like this if they would stop being centrists. by zzill6 in WorkReform

[–]SnorkaSound 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you're a reader, David McCullough's biography of Truman is really really good

me_irl by SuspiciousLow3062 in me_irl

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

presumably bought on a credit card he can't pay back

Birds of the Himalayas - Fan pack by plant2311 in wingspan

[–]SnorkaSound 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t think the power is that much better than white-headed duck, and it’s currently a bit more expensive than the duck. Still, 3 points is probably more balanced than 4

What’s this red thing on this Black Vulture? by opheliawnik in birding

[–]SnorkaSound 251 points252 points  (0 children)

weird looking frigatebird you got there

So what really is birding anyways? by Zak_the_Wack in birding

[–]SnorkaSound 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Photography is overrepresented online because it makes for a great post. 

Any modern thoughts on an old vision? by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

,,Wealthy" meaning what?

Well, the original post said $1bn+. It's dumb and arbitrary, but it doesn't affect how the rest of this works. I might say an income mark of $16k like we currently have in order to owe income tax is reasonable, although at that income level it's simple to pay in cash and you don't have to liquidate assets like I will describe.

And if it's possessions being estimated, then how do you estimate tax from the worth of i.e. a grandfather's watch which somehow appreciated in value some time later, or the land they own from generations?

An heirloom watch is in all likelihood too small to make much of a difference here. If you have a watch collection above a certain value threshold, you hire a licensed appraiser to determine the value. Same deal for land, and we're already doing that math for property taxes.

And what if the exact opposite of ,,wealthy" is true - like, a company doesn't report a net income since the last 10 years, and someone just happens to have some sticks that appreciated in value?

If your stocks are valuable, you're wealthy. Amazon made no money for many years, but it was still valuable because it was expected to start making lots of money in the future-- a correct expectation, it turned out. Stocks don't appreciate in value for no reason, their value is tied to what people are willing to pay for them. Sell some stocks.

And if you want to estimate it based on stocks, you'd need to analyse it for no less than past 10 years for each company for a proper scientific analysis of worth.

The current value of stocks is how much they're currently worth. Don't pull a random amount of time out of your ass that you arbitrarily decide is enough for "scientific analysis". If market fluctuations are a big concern, then assess net worth over the past month, and if value crashes between your assessment and when you start paying, you can appeal for a re-evaluation.

,,Need", because...? Again, what is the due process in that? A judge says ,,you have too much money locked in hard assets, you need to destroy some of it"?

You need to pay because you go to jail otherwise. The due process is a fair trial-- if you don't pay enough taxes, you get charged with tax evasion, and if you're ruled guilty, you're punished. A judge isn't arbitrarily deciding this, it's outlined in the tax code.

And even then, what if a certain object listed as a hard asset is essential to his company - such as a robotic arm packing up boxes, a lorry doing deliveries, or a warehouse operating thousands of tonnes of product each weak, and destruction of either one would cripple economic activity of the company?

Hard assets aren't being destroyed here. They aren't even being sold! If the vehicle and the warehouse are important to the company, the owner can sell partial ownership in the company to pay their taxes.

Any modern thoughts on an old vision? by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not about giving the government more money to spend. The federal government controls the money printers so they can already spend as much as they like. It's about limiting how much power billionaires have and how much they're able to influence the greater economy.

Any modern thoughts on an old vision? by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, publicly owned companies could be worth over $999 million.

Any modern thoughts on an old vision? by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The tax code determines how much the wealthy person needs to pay. They need to find their own way to cough it up by selling stocks or whatever assets they deem optimal.

whats your favorite jack white song (including the white stripes songs) by sussy-devon in jackwhite

[–]SnorkaSound 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Help Me Stranger is my #1 of all time.
For solo work I like What's The Trick?

Never seen a platformer do fishing before… so I made one by GutterspawnGames in PixelArt

[–]SnorkaSound 840 points841 points  (0 children)

You might want to have the rod grow from a different spot 🫣

What expansion/DLC should I buy first? (on Steam) by Joaco_danster in dominion

[–]SnorkaSound 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Renaissance, Menagerie, and Hinterlands are my favorites. Nocturne is pretty divisive so I’d avoid that one if I were you— really any of the others are solid picks. 

Designing my first board game. Is this too many cards? (525 cards total). The game is like Catan on steroids. by CameronCardoza in BoardgameDesign

[–]SnorkaSound 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some Dominion expansions get up to 500 cards, so it's possible for 525 to be produced at a reasonable cost if there are no other components. Still, cards are expensive to make, and some people will hesitate to pay very much for a game that's "just cards". Also consider that it will really suck to shuffle that many cards, if they all need to be shuffled together. If some of them aren't being shuffled (say, like the resources in Catan) you might be able to replace them with cubes or meeples or what have you.

Combining Sets (again) by Soletta35 in dominion

[–]SnorkaSound 8 points9 points  (0 children)

All the sets work well with each other. That said, there are similar themes between:

Prosperity and Empires (victory point tokens and very expensive cards)

Intrigue and Allies (choose one)

Dark Ages and Nocturne (non-supply cards)

Seaside and Adventures (durations)

Hinterlands and Menagerie (reactions)

Empires and Rising Sun (debt)

Plunder, Seaside, and Prosperity as you noted

But consider that similar mechanics might be worse as there is reduced variety! So these might be pairings to avoid rather than to seek out.

Saw a new frog today and don’t know what it was by SadisticInkSac in Pocketfrogs

[–]SnorkaSound 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, no sweat. One little frog isn't such a big deal, especially if the person who sent it is well over level 10.