I like how you completely sidestepped the rebuttal of your argument which I also added in there. And how you've failed to respond to the question of why someone

I like how you completely sidestepped the rebuttal of your argument which I also added in there. And how you've failed to respond to the question of why someone who can't demonstrate that they can distinguish council and counsel should be taken seriously on such a matter -- especially when they are making such bombastic claims. If we look further on in the thread, you make even more ridiculous claims, for example, that companies should be able to compensate their employees with free options. Don't you think it's incumbent on someone who takes these positions to demonstrate that they understand why the law requires proper dating of options, or FFS why income tax exists even, as your proposals have very broad reaching implications?