The author does a lot of fence-sitting for very little conclusion. For instance:<p><pre><code> Your focus should be on responsibly tracking your cashflow
</code></pre>
versus<p><pre><code> [A]ll I really only care about is one thing: my bank balance
</code></pre>
Responsibly tracking cash flow is completely different than knowing your bank balance. One is hard and requires keeping track of income, payments, expenses, etc; the other involves pushing a button at an ATM.<p>Similarly:<p><pre><code> You...need an accountant. Someone who can do your tax
</code></pre>
versus<p><pre><code> what you really need is software
</code></pre>
TurboTax != a trained accountant.<p>It's also childishly written. "The nasty stuff the tax man needs to see," really? It's almost as bad as Blogger Bob. This reads like (bad) advertising copy for a press release, but it somehow got five points in five minutes. I'd suspect fake accounts, but pg is good about detecting upvote rings.