This. The imagery is that a rich person carrying too much stuff would have difficulty going through the gate whereas a poor person wouldn’t.

More reflection is required for a deeper understanding.

Why is water wet?

;-)

With sincerity, I think you may misunderstand what GP is pointing out. I understood “forecasts” to be a simulation run using a model. In that case, they took 14 models and ran those each at least once to come up with 17 predictions.

What GP wants is transparency around how many possible models were there over the last decades from which they chose the 14. This gives the reader a better understanding of whether 14 is a lot or a little. It is a fair point IMO regardless of their overall stance on the issue.

They did a literature search and chose what was reproducible. This has been covered in TFA and highlighted by a comment nearby: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21709446

It's not obvious to me that you can't also have a progressive / marginal tax system for property taxes based on home valuations (e.g. home values >$1MM taxed higher than those worth $200K). So, I don't think property taxes are inherently regressive.

That said, I don't think it's enough to just look at one tax. We have to consider taxes and regulations as a whole to understand whether a place is overall regressive or not. This leaves room for different implementations of tax policy which if done correctly will benefit the people.

I am sorry I don’t quite understand the point you’re trying to make here.

Who is the right that you are talking about?

Complaining is part of free speech as long as it doesn’t infringe on others right to complain back as well. If they complain because they disagree, that’s a very different thing than not defending or being hypocritical about free speech.

FWIW from my experience, the people I talk to respect players’ right to kneel even if they don’t agree with that action. That is the key to free speech I think —- to disagree peacefully but respect people’s right to express themselves.

Before people learned that the geocentric model is wrong, how do you suppose they discuss, learn, and share ideas to arrive at the truth? How do they know what is “worth exploring” and who decides that?

Furthermore, once the facts are established, I personally believe it’s important for people to express their ideas even if it’s out of ignorance because then we can know to edify. Not everyone will be willing to listen, learn, and change but without free speech and exchange of ideas I find it hard to see how people will grow effectively.