The plaintiffs’ arguments in Moore v. United States have little basis in law — unless you think that a list of long-ago-discarded laissez-faire decisions from the early 20th century remain good law. And a decision favoring these plaintiffs could blow a huge hole in the federal budget. While no Warren-style wealth tax is on the books, the Moore plaintiffs do challenge an existing tax that is expected to raise $340 billion over the course of a decade.
But Republicans also hold six seats on the nation’s highest Court, so there is some risk that a majority of the justices will accept the plaintiffs’ dubious legal arguments. And if they do so, they could do considerable damage to the government’s ability to fund itself.
Uh huh, just people that force your argument into a corner, then you lash out. Gotcha, so just childish bigoted behavior.
I never lashed out lol
I really do think you’re crazy. I find it kinda hot.
Calling people crazy because you can’t defend your actual argument is lashing out.
Sexual harassment too, you’re a fucking weirdo dude.
I called you crazy because you said crazy shit, not because e you disagree with me. The person who insulted the other for disagreeing is you.
It’s not sexual harassment to be turned on.
Ya huh, your the most correct boy who ever lived. You’re also full of shit about me insulting you first dumb dumb.
It is if you tell them other person and they clearly want nothing to do with you.
Probably not ever
Most correct boy doesn’t know the answer?!
See above comment for my position there.
It’s important to be humble.
You should take that advice.