Did you read the part that says he's the past CEO of Intuit? Not involved with Intuit's current lobbying. In any case attacking the author or Intuit about something that has nothing to do with the topic doesn't make sense.
It makes sense if trying to discredit him/put him down. It seems like an emotional reaction and it makes me wonder if the commenter has vested interest in incentivized crypto-assets like Bitcoin - Pyramid-Ponzi scheme structures.
Edit to add: I just realized the original comment might not have been said maliciously, and simply pointing out the ex-CEO was positioning himself well, if he was also part of the lobbying efforts - and if he owns stock still then it could benefit him.
Comments
Did you read the part that says he's the past CEO of Intuit? Not involved with Intuit's current lobbying. In any case attacking the author or Intuit about something that has nothing to do with the topic doesn't make sense.
They've been at it for a long time https://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/Tax_Maze_Repor...
It makes sense if trying to discredit him/put him down. It seems like an emotional reaction and it makes me wonder if the commenter has vested interest in incentivized crypto-assets like Bitcoin - Pyramid-Ponzi scheme structures.
Edit to add: I just realized the original comment might not have been said maliciously, and simply pointing out the ex-CEO was positioning himself well, if he was also part of the lobbying efforts - and if he owns stock still then it could benefit him.
Does he still own stock?
How would that make the original comment more or less valid?
Someone's downvoted me for asking a question for clarification? I'm regularly reminded how garbage downvotes are.