Bolling said the United States has "the highest corporate tax rate in the free
world." He was referring to the statutory rate, meaning the rate before
deductions. On that score, he’s right: The United States does have the highest
statutory rate among developed countries. However, the United States’ corporate
tax rate doesn’t appear to be the highest once deductions and other exclusions
are taken into account.
I found it an interesting article so I decided to share.
The US effective corporate tax rate tends to be 25% to 27% in normal times, which is still one of the highest effective tax rates in the world. The median S&P 500 effective tax rate is 30%, also one of the highest rates in the world.
You often see 12% or 13% bandied about as the effective rate, but that's intentional intellectual fraud: they refer to 2010 numbers, when the US was coming out of the great recession and corporations had lost a ton of money.
There's also some countries that have relatively "low tax rate" but very high social security costs which are not always counted as tax rates by studies.
For anyone curious, this uses the same idea as the "guess-and-check" approach spullara mentioned: https://qht.co/item?id=953569
It changes the content of the commit (by iterating the hash in the commit message itself) until the hash of the child commit matches. A big part of the trick is that it only looks at a prefix of the hash, so the search space is much smaller than the full SHA1 hash.
> ...if transfers worked exactly as handing someone some gold does...
I have never bought gold, other than in jewelry, I suppose, so I could be wrong about this. As I understand it, transferring gold is actually quite difficult, unless you trust the person. Don't you need to weigh it and test it for purity? Bitcoin transactions over long distance are enormously easier than a gold transaction over long distance, I would imagine, too.
That's correct, but this shouldn't be understated. Bitcoin provides the ability to be sure that a transaction is legitimate when you're on the receiving end, and that the it can't be canceled later. This can be done without knowing anything about the person on the sending end, much less require a level of trust based on the sender's reputation.
Exactly what I was thinking about as a I read the essay! I was disappointed when instead of being about how incredible it is that the cosmos can produce a pencil, it was about claiming that the cosmos can do it "without the government."
I think 'ars is saying that these are "personalized" email addresses: there is a separate one for each person from whom 'ars wants to receive email. Assuming these addresses aren't easily guessable/enumerable, and aren't on any lists stolen from or sold by service providers, the spammer must have have gotten them somewhere else.
The problem is that pretty much every one of them have probably given one or more services access to download their contact data to connect them to their friends, so any number of services other than their e-mail likely contains these personalized e-mail addresses.
Someone has likely been hacked or sold/leaked data, but he should assume that those addresses have been spread quite a bit voluntarily by his friends/associates.
