Originally posted by Starhawk
Of course not, don't be stupid, no one is saying that, simply that they can help out alittle more. Eliminate the tax loop holes and up the tax on the higher bracket of income 5%.
...and I'm directly asking [asked] you, 'how much is enough?' Don't be a stupid dodger [again] and answer the ****ing question McFly.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Your an idiot, do some research on the condition before your start spewing verbal nonsense.
Do a search on Google (or other search engine) for "is Fibromyalgia psychosomatic". Many doctors/researchers tend to think this. Duh.
Oh look, it's the little whiny liar who continually cries about keeping the debate mature and "doesn't result to insulting"... no worries though, people already thought you were a hypocrite and a liar.
"Originally posted by Starhawk
I'm not banned because I debate maturely and I don't insult others. People don't get banned simply because they share a different opinion then you."
...and I'm directly asking [asked] you, 'how much is enough?' Don't be a stupid dodger [again] and answer the ****ing question McFly.
You insult me and then call me a hypocrite for calling you an idiot? Logic just isn't your thing, I understand.
Eliminate the tax loop holes and up the tax on the higher bracket of income 5%.
I was perfectly clear as to what I would like to see done. If your having trouble reading the english language It's not my fault.
Originally posted by Starhawk
You insult me and then call me a hypocrite for calling you an idiot? Logic just isn't your thing, I understand.[b]Eliminate the tax loop holes and up the tax on the higher bracket of income 5%.
I was perfectly clear as to what I would like to see done. If your having trouble reading the english language It's not my fault. [/B]
Awesome, the good old troll tactic #142 'REVERSAL OF BLAME".
I didn't insult you, "I shared a different opinion than you" [see your quote above, hypocrite] on a medical condition. Duh.
...and I am asking you how much exactly? As in up the tax 6%, 7%, 20%, ??%. Duh.
As far as being clear, it takes you on the average 20 post to solidy your stances as you constantly shift them as people disprove [with facts] your whimsical opions that you try and pass as fact... talk about a lack of logic. Duh.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Yes that is exactly how it happens.And Robtard, they have yet to provide any facts or figures on their end ethier.
So going by your logic, if I walk down the street and see a person in trouble, I should do nothing to help because it doesn't serve me in any way.
Nonsense, it might make you feel very good. It might offer you chances with the person you saved. There are lots of reasons why people help others....but it shouldn't be forced, if that is what you said (in your own extremely stupid way) then yeah.
Originally posted by chithappens
You talked about contributing to society.Entertainment as contributive as being a nurse as the child is being brought into the world?
Well, yeah...it is contributing more to society. More people care for it. More people are excited by it. More people are willing to spend money on it.
I am sure it's really great to be a nurse and it's a decent job, no doubt...just....everyone can bring a child into the world....it worked 10 000 (and many more) years without nurses....it's a luxury to get your kid in a hospital.....and it's just not worth as much as what Michael Jordan does considering that there are thousands of nurses that do it but just one Michael Jordan.
Originally posted by Starhawk
No it's not shit, if a rich kid is failing, their parents go , let him pass and we will get you as new football field or library. It happens.And if he signs up for student aid, then when he gets done, not only does he have to find a job, but also a crippling debt to work off.
It is undeniable that richer kids have extreme advantages and have to work far far less then those from middle class or poorer class backgrounds.
I'm honestly shocked no one on your side of this has suggested euthinizing the poor and disabled for the benefit of the rich yet. It would seem to go along with your beliefs.
To start off: You are an idiot.
Now we know where we are staying:
You just disregard people that did what they by their own ability. Dude, look at the Internet...everything that you use so easily, it wouldn't have been possible without people like Bill Gates and the likes who had good ideas were able to provide a good service and did it. You want to tax them more because they were smart? Dude, look what rich people gave you. Be grateful.
What about Google? They don't even ****ing charge you to use their programs. They take the money from other corporations who think it is smart to invest. And you ****ing idiot want to steal the money they more than deserve after all they did for you? Dude, they openly offered their idea for a search engine...if you had been as smart as them you could be Google now. No one was. They deserve every penny they make.
Do you cry yourself to sleep for being such a selfish idiot? I know I would if I was a ****ing ungrateful parasite.
Originally posted by StarhawkI agree that they deserve to have the bigger house and the nice car, but they also have a responsiblity to help out more when the need is there.
As I said from your example, we should just kill off the poor and disabled and not help anyone unless we get something for it.
No, they don't have more of a responsibility. They have the same. It is amazingly nice that a percentagerwise tax system is even offered. They would pay much more with a flat tax...it would just be more fair because everyone would contribute equally (at least percentwise). They don't have more responsibility because they were better at what they do. That's nonsense.
Originally posted by Starhawk
I really hope none of you ever come across someone who needs your help, cause unless they pay you money they would be shit out of luck.
At least we wouldn't make a difference. You should really start thinking for yourself. Cause either you are just stupid or you are actually greedy and evil wanting more than you and others deserve.
Socialists are quite able to pass their (many) shortcomings off as virtues. Well, it's bullshit. Just because all the poor people who are not able to earn more money agree that the rich people who know how to create value should provide for them doesn't make it moral. It is still egoist. Yes, Starhawk, your philosophy is true selfishness.
Originally posted by Starhawk
And yes you pay taxes, but rich people can afford at least a minor tax increase to help out more.
Of course they can afford it. They could probably afford you taking 90% of their money. But there's just one thing..
BY WHAT RIGHT!?
Only because you want to spend it on the incompetent?
Originally posted by Starhawk
The problem is such that we can't leave it up to choice, and no, being greedy and selfish should not be a choice.
Apparently it is for you.
Originally posted by Starhawk
If you leave it up to personal choice no one would help out. The government forces them to through taxes because it's the only way it will get done.
No, the government takes taxes because it provides it's citizens with certain services (infrastructure, police, etc.)
That it is used to give the poor who weren't able to get money themselves more is quite a misusage of the original idea. And well, I guess it works as long as the rich people let themselves be enslaved by people of your retarded school of mind.
Originally posted by UshgarakWell, it turned into that debate, not sure if it was planned as that.
So, just to be clear here, has it turned out that this entire thread has just been an excuse for Starhawk to pontificate about wealth reallocation?I'd better close if so; that certainly needs its own thread.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I dunno, it appears to me is that the thrust of his argument is that Canada won't sign precisely because it won't make such a reallocation.
Exactly, the main point of the thread is the fact that Canada will not do the right thing and comply with Kyoto, then we got into a debate over how to off set the costs, which lead to the tax debate. It all still originates from the same topic.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Exactly, the main point of the thread is the fact that Canada will not do the right thing and comply with Kyoto, then we got into a debate over how to off set the costs, which lead to the tax debate. It all still originates from the same topic.
And yet still the effects that mankind has on the environment aren't proven.
Besides when China, the US, Australia and India won't sign it the treaty will make no difference. Canada is just playing smart by not wasting billions of dollars for nothing.
Originally posted by Fishy
And yet still the effects that mankind has on the environment aren't proven.Besides when China, the US, Australia and India won't sign it the treaty will make no difference. Canada is just playing smart by not wasting billions of dollars for nothing.
The majority of scientific minds in the world realize the damage we are doing to the environment, and the reason countries won't comply with Kyoto is that money means more to them then their lives and the lives of their populace. You think it's a coincidence that cancer rates are rising? That we are getting super-storms like hurricane katrina? What has to happen before you realize what we are doing to our world? And the rich would not even notice a 5% tax increase, but it could help Canada comply with Kyoto.
Originally posted by Fishy
And yet still the effects that mankind has on the environment aren't proven.Besides when China, the US, Australia and India won't sign it the treaty will make no difference. Canada is just playing smart by not wasting billions of dollars for nothing.
This is not true because it encourages industrialization among non developed nations meaning that they will eventually have just as much in the air as developed nations because there is no roof for previously non developed nations.
Damn oxymorons.
Originally posted by Starhawk
The majority of scientific minds in the world realize the damage we are doing to the environment, and the reason countries won't comply with Kyoto is that money means more to them then their lives and the lives of their populace. You think it's a coincidence that cancer rates are rising? That we are getting super-storms like hurricane katrina? What has to happen before you realize what we are doing to our world? And the rich would not even notice a 5% tax increase, but it could help Canada comply with Kyoto.
what is with people trying to speak for the scientific community?
sigh......
Originally posted by Starhawk
The majority of scientific minds in the world realize the damage we are doing to the environment, and the reason countries won't comply with Kyoto is that money means more to them then their lives and the lives of their populace. You think it's a coincidence that cancer rates are rising? That we are getting super-storms like hurricane katrina? What has to happen before you realize what we are doing to our world? And the rich would not even notice a 5% tax increase, but it could help Canada comply with Kyoto.
Money IS the lives of them and their population. How can you fail to realise that? Kyoto costs jobs and achieves nothing.
You also cannot prove that about the majority of scientific minds, There is, in fact, no decent consensus on this topic.
Btw, 'Super' storms? El Nino. Bugger all you can do about that.
Originally posted by inimalist
pssst, starhawk, the real debate in the scientific community is the amount of human contribution to global warming and how certain we can be about the projected consequences and predictions.
You honestly think the amount of pollution we have spewed into the sir is not damaging it? Please, sorry if I don't buy into the right wing BS. They are trying to discredit the environmental concerns to preserve the economy, I would rather have clean air and not develop cancer instead.
???
you do know that there is no accurate or absolute way to measure whether or not carbon has anything more than a corelational relationship with global temperature...
We do not have the ability to accurately predict weather even 24 hours from now given how complex global climate patterns are.
You have a gross misunderstanding of what scientists really know about these things, which is understandable, given how the green community has jumped all over this issue just like any other group with a doomsday prophecy.