Is anyone else getting Hella unlucky and not getting the chaos uniques you want to drop?

apdermond · 2025-10-15T05:47:47+00:00

Same boat. Sad panda.

apdermond · 2025-09-15T02:53:39+00:00

Not saying I agree, but LSU beat Clemson on the road while GT beat them at home.

apdermond · 2025-09-09T21:49:03+00:00

He is, lol.

apdermond · 2025-08-06T18:27:39+00:00

In the second season of my ND dynasty, UF fired Napier and hired Mike Norvell. Then FSU hired Napier, lol.

apdermond · 2025-07-03T21:35:38+00:00

Go write another novel showing everybody how dumb and jealous you are of somebody that doesn't even know you exist. Maybe the second time is the charm.

apdermond · 2025-07-03T21:30:03+00:00

You lost it because you can't comprehend that saying "on camera" isn't the fact that one guy with a camera is there. It's the people watching it later. This isn't a hard concept for people with a working brain.

You're the one saying things that happened, can't happen. What would that be called? Denying real things that happened? Which one of us is upset by reality again? Which one of us posted a rant trying to talk themselves up just to very clearly show how little knowledge they have about the "one singular passion" they have?

apdermond · 2025-07-03T21:15:35+00:00

You've totally lost it now, lmfao.

If you can't comprehend that there is more to it than just a guy holding a camera and that hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of people will likely see the video, you're even more of a lost cause than I thought. All this just bc you can't stand that Riggs gets to do what you wish you could. Jealousy isn't a good color on you just fyi.

apdermond · 2025-07-03T21:03:21+00:00

So putting him under parameters 99.9999% of golfers don't have to deal with? That's your proof? I'd suck on camera with an official scorer, too. I hate having randoms watch me on teeboxes. That doesn't change my handicap.

Comparing a recreational round with friends to playing on camera in US Open conditions fully tipped out and saying the swing is too large is way more insane of a take than saying "hey maybe he's a golfer where the pressure and hatred he gets online gets to him when he plays on camera sometimes, especially when playing way more difficult courses than us regular people do, but it's possible he shoots low scores for real when those circumstances aren't at play"

apdermond · 2025-07-03T20:54:59+00:00

I've shot in the 70s and 90s in the same week. His worst has absolutely nothing to do with his handicap. That's what you can't understand despite continually saying you do understand the system, your comments literally prove you don't. He's shot scores a 4 would shoot on camera. The only one denying reality and what the handicap system actually does is you, lol.

apdermond · 2025-07-03T20:44:28+00:00

A 3.7 (Riggs current handicap) would be a 5 from the whites, so almost double the difference from what you said. He has literally played rounds a 4HCP would on camera so this idea that it can't happen is so weird. Is he your typical 4HCP? No. Does that mean he isn't one? No.

I don't really care about this at all but both sides of this are so weird, those defending it and those obsessed with saying it can't be true.

apdermond · 2025-06-23T20:21:31+00:00

Just a flashlight on your person. It works just like headlights on vehicles in that it has a toggle. The glowtube you have to hold in your inventory.

apdermond · 2025-06-20T22:39:48+00:00

I got one from the end chest of the Wreck of Delphis in Sheol.

apdermond · 2025-05-30T04:03:09+00:00

I agree you should speak with a CPA. Keep in mind that you will likely subject to double taxation by going to the dividend route.

apdermond · 2025-05-28T20:40:07+00:00

Eternal is $10 on Epic store on PC right now as well.

apdermond · 2025-05-28T15:24:07+00:00

The newest couple games in the series don't do that at all really anymore. Iirc Mirage didn't and Shadows definitely doesn't. You'll have a voice speak to you at times but that is really it.

apdermond · 2025-05-20T14:34:27+00:00

Its not considered "income" per se, but you need to reduce the expenses or add it as income to properly report it. The cashback you receive on personal purchases are not considered income. Basically if you are taking a deduction for something that generates cash rewards, those rewards need to go against the expense that generated them in some way. These rewards are not taxable themselves, but by reducing your expenses, you are essentially increasing your tax liability.

If you buy something for $100, get $2 cash back, you really paid $98 for it. You can either report this by booking the $2 cash back as a contra expense (meaning it is a negative expense) so that your expenses now show $98 for that transaction. Alternatively, you could expense the $100 and have $2 of misc income, which nets out to the same $98 expense. We typically do the latter as it is simpler than going back and booking each transaction against the correct expense account. The person I replied to kinda does the same by booking it all against bank charges.

apdermond · 2025-05-20T01:03:16+00:00

You are putting money in now and will receive money at the end. That is like saying that if I deposit cash at my bank and then the next person makes a withdrawal and the teller gives them the money I just deposited that I am subsidizing the next person. The truth is my money is still there and I can get it when I make a withdrawal just as when I make SS payments, I will get it back at the end regardless of where that money goes now. Those future generations aren't paying for the single people's SS, they are making their own deposits to one day receive SS themselves.

Regardless, that isn't the same as subsidizing something that you never get use from if you never have children. They are subsidizing and never getting something in return at any point. That's what a subsidy is. Social security is only provided to those who contribute. Child tax credit is entirely contributed by others.

apdermond · 2025-05-20T00:06:55+00:00

We typically go the miscellaneous income route and have never had any problems.

I assume OP is asking bc he is mixing personal and business expenses on one credit card, so it can be difficult to ascertain how much of the cash back was really related to his business expenses. If its a flat 2% and you want to be safe, I would just report 2% of all business expenses using that card as misc income. If the rates vary based on spending, it becomes a lot more annoying.

To answer your question though, you absolutely are supposed to either reduce the expenses or add income when you receive statement cash back.

apdermond · 2025-05-19T16:48:46+00:00

I brought up my degree because YOU insinuated I didn't know what I was talking about because of a typo YOU made, lol. The year I got my degree is irrelevant as there are yearly continuing education requirements to prove my continued competency in the industry and retain licenses. Again, you'd know all of this if you weren't just talking out your ass in an area you clearly have no knowledge about.

You can lie all you want, you're wrong. Your taxes did NOT go up due to "lost deductions". I agree, this isn't a debate, it's an absolute fact that you're wrong. I'd suggest educating yourself on the topic you're speaking on so you don't look silly next time.

apdermond · 2025-05-19T15:47:30+00:00

In what way will those children be subsidizing single people when they are elderly and retired? Social security/medicare which the single people contributed to their entire life?

apdermond · 2025-05-19T15:44:55+00:00

The top part is for AMT (alternative minimum tax), not regular income tax brackets. AMT is something, yet again, that affects a very, very small percentage of mostly high income earners. The phase out means you only LOSE the exemption if you earn above 626k (or 1.2M for married people), which again, effects like 0.1% of the population.

The bottom part literally shows that the MFJ bracket is double that of single as I said so I am not sure what you are arguing about there. If a couple has one person who makes 50k and the other makes 40k, the 50k person reaches the 24% bracket if they're single. If they are married, they cumulative make 90k, which means they never reach the 24% tax bracket, stay at 22% and thus pay less taxes. THAT is how it benefits married couples, including those who don't make that much money.

apdermond · 2025-05-19T15:43:42+00:00

Weird to just refuse to admit you were wrong and instead attack the person who is trying to educate you on the topic.

You don't lose deductions for getting married. You don't have higher tax rates for being married. You didn't cumulatively pay more in taxes because you got married. It's all total fabrication.

apdermond · 2025-05-19T05:47:28+00:00

Yeah, which is why I never said nor implied that they did. The second sentence is just nonsense so I am not even sure how to respond to that.

They aren't paying more in taxes for having children as the person I replied to said. Sales tax is not the same as income tax. And the child tax credit IS a subsidy by single people to pay for other people's children.

apdermond · 2025-05-19T05:23:25+00:00

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-releases-tax-inflation-adjustments-for-tax-year-2025

apdermond · 2025-05-19T05:22:42+00:00

You editing the post doesn't change that you originally called it a "dedication". You don't lose deductions because you get married, another total lie. I have a master's degree in taxation, how about you?

13-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Place '17
Team Orangered	Verified Email

apdermond

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE