Glad you agree.  So what more is there to discuss? LW's idiotic comparison of welfare to the Octuplet mom being the same as a tax cut.

As for the rest of your statement, no, you're just clueless. The money we earn is ours. It is not inherently the government's. 

Since we're approaching tax time, I would highly recommend you not talk about how generous the government is to the guy who's paying millions in taxes. Because Maudlin, you're very close to losing access to JU.  

You want to talk about issues in the abstract, be my guest.  But don't sit on the site that we provide to you for free and try to argue that the govenrment is "giving" me money.  

Let's get some facts out of the way:

1. The government doesn't give me a cent.  I am not a company. So comparing me personally to the Octuplet mom is incredibly offensive. I do not exist as some sort of machine to provide jobs and opportunities to others.

2. The state government has agreed to reduce the amount of money it takes. 53 employees over 10 years is a $25 million investment by Stardock (that's just salary, not counting benefits, buildout costs, maint. etc.). In exchange, they have agreed to reduce the taxes we pay on our profits by up to $1.1M (give or take).  If we aren't profitable, for some reason, then obviously the taxes cut aren't there. The state takes no risk at all here.

3. The state government has agreed to do the above because running a tech company in Michigan is more expensive than in other states due to higher taxes, smaller employee base, poorer tech infrastructure, etc.  The state of Michigan is wisely trying to make the state more competitive for businesses.

4. Let me just say it again: A tax cut is NOT free money. That "logic" only works if you assume that all of your earnings are property of the government and what you keep is merely the money the government allows you to have.

5. The law of JU remains the same: Don't piss me off. I don't care about your opnions on any political matter. But if you are going to start attacking, insulting or demeaning me or our company (or helping those that do) then you're out of here. 

We have charities.  If people feel the way they do, they should donate to charity.

I personally resent having to pay for other people's so-called compassion. In a country where nearly half the country pays no net taxes, it's pretty ridiculous that we're transfering cash payments to individuals for irresponsible behavior.

in regards to the mass implantation, if i remember correctly, they implant about 10 eggs, usually only a few take, and in the rare case that more than 2 take they abort the others. So, the crazy part here is her carrying 8 babies at once... how does that even WORK? how is there space in the stomach for that?

oh wait, I SEE how it works: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/11/octuplet-mom-nadya-sulema_n_166030.html

Notice every single baby is on life support? because there is not enough space in the stomach they are all under developed, and underdeveloped babies are SICK babies, they are going to have a variety of issues growing up, from diseases to weak immune system to lower IQ than they could have otherwise had. It is criminal that she carried them ALL to term instead of limiting herself to 2-3 at once and giving those the change to fully develop.

 She also receives $490 a month in food stamps and receives about $600 in disability payments a month for each of the three of her older six children with disabilities. One has ADHD, one had a speech impediment and one has autism,

Wow... ADHD and "speech impediment" counts as a disability for which your parents get a check every month? how fucked up is that?

When you subsidize disability in an environment of underemployed lawyers (has there ever been a time when there was a shortage of lawyers?), the definition of disability continuously expands and the incidence of disability skyrockets.  Nothing mysterious about that.

So that we're clear:

Good political debate need not be personal.

I want people to debate the issues. I get pretty irritated when people try to drag me personally into the discussion, especially when they don't know what they're talking about.

People love the strawman "I got banned for disagree with Brad".  People disagree with Brad.  What gets them thrown off is when they stop talking about politics and instead target me personally or the company.

No, that's not the way it works.  The common practice with a woman as young as this is to only implant a max of 3 embryos.  The ultimate goal is 1 baby at a time.  I don't know anyone who would suggest going in and aborting if all 3 took.  When there are more than 3, that's when things get down right dangerous for mom and babies.

Debating won't jeopordize anything.  Personal attacks will indeed do the trick but that should be a no brainer and not need to be spelled out or reminded.  If you are too stupid to follow that simple rule, you don't belong here.

thanks for the correction, then the doctor was doing it wrong then... probably at her request... maybe she figured "hey, if i had 6 babies at once I will be famous and get more donations... and the doctor says they will be disabled due to premature birth! That means MORE FREE MONEY!"

Honestly she should be jailed for reckless endangerment of her children. or something like that.

I wonder if that'll be deducted from her welfare check?

I wonder when they'll suspend the MD who implanted the embryos (first and second times)?

I wonder when the awesome responsibility of parenthood will be licensed? After all, to sell hot dogs, cut hair, do plumbing or drive a car you need one.

Won't have to wait too long, what with the official birth of the nanny state courtesy of BO.  Federally controlled licenses for just about every aspect of life are the logical and probably inevitable consequence of ever-expanding federal largesse - we must be sure that the mythical 'taxpayers' money' is wisely spent, after all.  It may have already occurred to some Rahm Emanuel type, but the surest way to achieve complete federal gun control is to tax-subsidize gun ownership.  They made the first end-run around the 2nd amendment in the 1930's, which ultimately gave us what is now the ATF.

Yeah...sorry; old habits die hard, especially when I did it maybe once before. I apologize. Coulda sworn you wrote that, now I can't find it. My fault. You're still an asshole.

I think the babies should be adopted out to families that can honestly care for them, emotionally and psychologically as well as financially. Then she should be sterilized so it never happens again.

Lots of childless people out there; people with big hearts and homes. How much love, guidance and plain old stability do you think this creepy, whacked-out, self-deluding Angelina Jolie wannabe is going to be able to provide? For 14 kids?

You, on the other hand, want to leave them in the care of this woman, who is obviously suffering from some severe personality and mental issues. I've heard of kids being taken away for much less. Much less.

Typical, sad little bleeding heart liberal; that's right dear...when in doubt, nitpick and parse words.  Allow me, for a moment, the same priviledge: no, I'm not the primary CAREGIVER of any children. You know perfectly well what I meant; please stop being deliberately dense. She doesn't have a job....as in, gainful, clock-punching, taxpaying employment. She collects the fruits of others labors.

"So you have no problem with a society that leaves women and children to starve on the streets? Because that is the inevitable result if you don't have the government ensure that people can at least survive. Charity will help some people, but not all, since by it's nature it's unreliable."---maudlin, replying to Drag

And the government is a rock? Solid and trustworthy? Governmental bureacracy is a boil on the ass of the world. Can you say Katrina? Can you say the Department of Motor Vehicles, for crying out loud? I'll let a great man speak for himself:

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."---Ronald Reagan