The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet

  • 438 Replies
  • 28695 Views
*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #120 on: November 05, 2016, 03:38:07 PM »
Yes programs like that need to be funded...with taxes. I have never said taxes are wrong. Unfair taxes is what I preach again. Attacking someone and taking more because they are more successful, no I do not agree.

Let's say the 10 percent plan. 10 percrnt of all personal income, 15 percent of all business income. Sure someone making millions a year will be tons more than someone making 50k a year. However, it is still 10 percent.....no matter the amount the 10 percrnt is judged from. No tax breaks, no carried interest, no selling junk options to modulate loss, no nothing...simple simple. 10 percent and 15 percent.

And yes the "days of old" are perfectly viable today. We are still the same, just hundreds of years later. We are the same as Rome , etc etc. Time is just time passed, same issues. Remember the whole point of a government system here was simple.

Gather a group of people to work together managing a system that cares for infrastructure, military protection, policing, safety, and helping those that need it. In return we chip in a piece of our earnings. Nothing more or nothing less. (also remember, before career politicians, this was done for shit pay, sometimes no pay. People took this position as a duty to the country they loved. Then after a time it was passed to another...it was not a system you got in to get rich or powerful)


As to your question of the most extreme case...it will sound harsh, but if I must answer yes or no only, I will say yes. It is not natural, in nature that creature would die anyways (though it would never happen, as this is not natural, every creature is wired with the will to try and survive). Even if you believe we are created by a higher power, it still isn't natural as we are all creatures, rather we have a soul or not is of no importance, we are still a mammal that must fight to survive in this existence like any other mammal (unless a pet of course).

So let me ask you a question in return. Take my (I am sure absolutely horrible in your eyes, making me scum) answer, what would happen if we did cut off this worst case scenario? Completely....

I would put money on it, that the person after about a week of no food, and sleeping by a dumpster would suddenly be willing to do something. Like a free loading child cut off from the parent, so it is either fight or parish.....they are forced to get on their own feet, with their own means, and they will. May hate it at first, because it is foreign, but they will catch on, also be happier deep down in the long term.

Also, quite honestly, if you find that random person who will literally just "die" by starving to death with no fight... If I saw them wilting away with no care, I would admit them into a program for one who is "mentally disabled"...as that is the only condition one would do such an action. No different to me than someone suicidal who needs help.


Edit...I edited from no to yes, as I thought about it and double checked how you worded your question. For some reason I read do they deserve to live instead of do the deserve to die. Sorry
« Last Edit: November 05, 2016, 04:41:22 PM by Babyhighspeed »
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #121 on: November 05, 2016, 04:40:28 PM »
Yes programs like that need to be funded...with taxes. I have never said taxes are wrong. Unfair taxes is what I preach again. Attacking someone and taking more because they are more successful, no I do not agree.

Let's say the 10 percent plan. 10 percrnt of all personal income, 15 percent of all business income. Sure someone making millions a year will be tons more than someone making 50k a year. However, it is still 10 percent.....no matter the amount the 10 percrnt is judged from. No tax breaks, no carried interest, no selling junk options to modulate loss, no nothing...simple simple. 10 percent and 15 percent.
And which is fundamentally unfair, still, because 90% of what a poorer person makes is a hell of a lot less than 90% of someone that makes millions. The percentage cut you'd need to take to make up a fair budget would remove a huge fraction of what poorer people earn, which at the current state of affairs would bring them to a point where they could not survive. In which case, you'd have to pay more benefits, which have to be paid for somehow, so you'd have to raise taxes again, bringing more people down... Whereas the rich would barely notice, because they have plenty of buffer.
It's not attacking people because they make more. Taxes aren't attacks. The simple fact is, the rich can afford to give, say, 30%, whereas that would kill a lot of poor families, and you need a percentage like that if you want to afford anything.

Because, like I've said several times before, the cost of living is basically fixed. Cost of food, energy, mortgage/rent, there'll be some subtle variation but in general that's fixed at, say, $1000.
If you make $1000, taking 10% screws you. If you make $10,000, you could take 50% and you'd be fine.

10% means something completely different to a poor person, vs anyone rich or middling.

Quote
And yes the "days of old" are perfectly viable today. We are still the same, just hundreds of years later. We are the same as Rome , etc etc. Time is just time passed, same issues. Remember the whole point of a government system here was simple.

Gather a group of people to work together managing a system that cares for infrastructure, military protection, policing, safety, and helping those that need it. In return we chip in a piece of our earnings. Nothing more or nothing less. (also remember, before career politicians, this was done for shit pay, sometimes no pay. People took this position as a duty to the country they loved. Then after a time it was passed to another...it was not a system you got in to get rich or powerful)
We've moved on. For starters, the whole notion of "You get out what you put in," is nonsense. There's about an 80/90% component of dumb luck. Be born in the right place, have access to the right kinds of jobs, be skilled at the necessary things... For example, would you propose an inheritance tax of 100%? That truly would make people dependent on what they themselves can do. If not, then it's luck: poorer families suffer because they can't get the skills required for high-paying jobs, nor do they have the transportation to get to jobs, while the rich can just sit back and watch the interest grow.
Government is not simple, especially now society's moved on. Trying to make it simple is just throwing most of the country under the bus.

Sure, there are issues with career politicians, but here's the thing: if office is badly paid, it's exclusively open to the rich. Sure, that's an issue nowadays, but at least with the current system it can be fixed. There's no way for that to happen if office is its own reward. Career politicians are just the inevitable consequence of democracy, and they'd arise in the situation you're proposing as well.

Quote
As to your question of the most extreme case...it will sound harsh, but if I must answer yes or no only, I will say no. It is not natural, in nature that creature would die anyways (though it would never happen, as this is not natural, every creature is wired with the will to try and survive). Even if you believe we are created by a higher power, it still isn't natural as we are all creatures, rather we have a soul or not is of no importance, we are still a mammal that must fight to survive in this existence like any other mammal (unless a pet of course).

So let me ask you a question in return. Take my (I am sure absolutely horrible in your eyes, making me scum) answer, what would happen if we did cut off this worst case scenario? Completely....

I would put money on it, that the person after about a week of no food, and sleeping by a dumpster would suddenly be willing to do something. Like a free loading child cut off from the parent, so it is either fight or parish.....they are forced to get on their own feet, with their own means, and they will. May hate it at first, because it is foreign, but they will catch on, also be happier deep down in the long term.

Also, quite honestly, if you find that random person who will literally just "die" by starving to death with no fight... If I saw them wilting away with no care, I would admit them into a program for one who is "mentally disabled"...as that is the only condition one would do such an action. No different to me than someone suicidal who needs help.
Laziness should not be a capital crime.
But sure, let's look at your example. They go a while, get the urge to work, and... what then? They'd likely have a fair gap in their resume, they'd be pretty unskilled, and be in poor physical shape. There comes a point of no return. It'll take them longer than most to get a job, even if anywhere's hiring, and they'd probably lose their house in the mean time, which further narrows their prospects because most places want hygiene (showers aren't easy to access on the street) and a home address. They can fight all they want, but at a certain point hope's more or less gone.

"You get what you put in" is not how the real world works, nor can it work. The only way you can remove the dominant component of dumb luck is to at least try to even the playing field, which takes steps like healthcare, benefits which include those struggling to find work, funded by taxing the people who can afford to give it (not a punishment for earning money, 'as a duty to the country they loved' to use your ideal), and all the things you dismiss as socialism.

*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3598
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #122 on: November 05, 2016, 09:03:12 PM »
Jane for President!
My first act would be nuking Florida, I wouldn't recommend it.

I live in Florida  >:(

Me too.  >:(

Wait a minute. That's actually a scary thought you and I living in the same state.

Don't be scared, I won't let the penguins get you.

I feel so much better knowing you'll protect me from those dastardly penguins.
The Bible doesn't support a flat earth.

Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #123 on: November 06, 2016, 07:36:19 AM »
And which is fundamentally unfair, still, because 90% of what a poorer person makes is a hell of a lot less than 90% of someone that makes millions. The percentage cut you'd need to take to make up a fair budget would remove a huge fraction of what poorer people earn, which at the current state of affairs would bring them to a point where they could not survive. In which case, you'd have to pay more benefits, which have to be paid for somehow, so you'd have to raise taxes again, bringing more people down... Whereas the rich would barely notice, because they have plenty of buffer.
I have no idea what you are attempting to communicate with this. It is not fundamentally unfair because 10 percent is 10 percent. Of course the actual number amount will be lower or higher. As long as the percentage stays the same it is all gravy

You would actually get more money in with this, as right now only about a quarter of the populous pays positive income tax. This would be an example of fundamentally unfair. Enact the 10/15 percent plan along with the other changes I have already stated to the economy, you would have a very nice playing field where inflation/cost of living/wages are all proportional to each other, snipping under employment in the ass even for relatively simple jobs.
Quote
Because, like I've said several times before, the cost of living is basically fixed. Cost of food, energy, mortgage/rent, there'll be some subtle variation but in general that's fixed at, say, $1000.
If you make $1000, taking 10% screws you. If you make $10,000, you could take 50% and you'd be fine.

10% means something completely different to a poor person, vs anyone rich or middling.
If you want to talk about fundamentally unfair, increasing your percentage because you make more is. For reasons i have already stated. As usual it comes down to the same rhetoric "they can afford so take it", I have already stated what path this leads to.

Quote
We've moved on. For starters, the whole notion of "You get out what you put in," is nonsense. There's about an 80/90% component of dumb luck. Be born in the right place, have access to the right kinds of jobs, be skilled at the necessary things...
If this is your view it explains alot, and I kinda feel a little bad for you and I really think this mentality will greatly hinder you. Sure there is luck involved in things, but the high majority is hard work and determination. Get knocked down, come right back swinging. Some days are one step forward, two back..then you have those days 5 steps forward and none back.

Sure someone whom has a family such as Trump's that can loan you a million to start up a business, sure thats nice and take advantage of it. That is also the dream of any good father or mother, to have an inheritance to pass to your children to hopefully help them skip some steps in life. The inheritance is from what?? Hard work of the previous generation.

For example..when I got the Lockheed account some time back, it was by "dumb luck" I was able to speak to the director and sell myself for a trial run. It was not "dumb luck" I had the credentials, experience, and customer base for business references to actually get the deal. That was a little luck mixed with a ton of hard work.

Sure someone cant help where they are from, or situation they are born into. However, anywhere you are and whatever situation you are in...hard work, determination and creativity will reward you. May not reward you with millions all the time but it will set you ahead. Anywhere from someone in Haiti, to Baron Trump.



Quote
Laziness should not be a capital crime.
But sure, let's look at your example. They go a while, get the urge to work, and... what then? They'd likely have a fair gap in their resume, they'd be pretty unskilled, and be in poor physical shape. There comes a point of no return. It'll take them longer than most to get a job, even if anywhere's hiring, and they'd probably lose their house in the mean time, which further narrows their prospects because most places want hygiene (showers aren't easy to access on the street) and a home address. They can fight all they want, but at a certain point hope's more or less gone.

"You get what you put in" is not how the real world works, nor can it work. The only way you can remove the dominant component of dumb luck is to at least try to even the playing field, which takes steps like healthcare, benefits which include those struggling to find work, funded by taxing the people who can afford to give it (not a punishment for earning money, 'as a duty to the country they loved' to use your ideal), and all the things you dismiss as socialism.

Laziness is a "death sentence" in the real world though. You just don't realize that as you are so accustomed to having family protection and government protection that this reality does not compute. Family protection is a blessing and government protection is a luxury afforded by others labor. Neither is guaranteed.

You cannot live life assuming your meal will come from somewhere and someone will have your back. If this is your luck in life, then great, but in reality, the only person you can count on for anything is yourself and life is fight or die. I hope you always have family and friends to help and support you, and I hope your government is always solvent and supportive. Though you must never forget life is work, and life is not guaranteed. It sucks but it is what it is.

Forgetting this is just another building block into the eventual mentality of self entitlement.

Also....you are making a common mistake a wide eyed and bushy tailed young person makes. Thinking we are different, you are always saying "we have evolved"...no we haven't, this is also the number one reason history keeps repeating itself. Arrogance of people living thinking we are better or different than our ancestors. We are just the same now as 2k years ago and beyond.


Read George Washington's Memoirs and journals, read scholars text from 2k years ago etc etc. You will see we are all the same, talk the same, have the same problems and so forth. Sure they didn't have the "exact same problems", but they were the same. Disease, tyranny, moral, infrastructure, taxes, health, money etc etc...and they were very very intelligent even without an I pad.

Their main reason for recording history was the same reason a parent leaves an inheritance...to help the future skip a step. Also so we don't keep letting history repeat itself. This was a very big deal for Washington just as an example.

So the "old ideas" you shit on because you are "new and improved", is false. It has been proven they work, fought for because they do work. They fall apart because corruption is allowed in during a juncture somewhere and it erodes. Not because the idea didn't work. History tells us so many answers, I feel bad ignoring my history teacher in middle school, as history is just as important or more so than any other subject.


I have also already proposed plans to help people that want to work and better themselves but lack skills. So I won't bother to reiterate what I've said a few times already there.

In closing to your last statement even though I addressed the subject in the beginning, life is what you put in is what you get. Sure it may not make you a millionaire Everytime, it will always be proportional to where and what you are. Preaching your message is dangerous and hinders people...because why do anything in this view of life?

It's all luck anyways right? Plus, even if you hit the jackpot with some luck, most of your rewards will be taken from you and given to the "unlucky" anyways so what's the point. If I lived in this reality I would just sleep all day. Wouldn't have to worry about food because I am sure some idiot somewhere is dumb enough to do some work, so I will get some hand outs from there. This is why socialism does not work(the mentality of all luck just adds on to the despare), the ones that strive after a while say screw it, no point .

I find it interesting, EVERY successful person I deal with or have met believe in "you reep what you sow", and they all prove its true. They also have shit for luck, and most came from literally nothing as I. My luck is absolutely horrendous as well. The only thing we all share in common is that view, and the fact no matter what attacked, just kept trudging forward. Sometimes for the worse and beat to shit, but still moving....life is tough and no one gets out alive.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2016, 07:43:58 AM by Babyhighspeed »
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

getrealzommb

  • 894
  • We do actually live on a ball: But who cares?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #124 on: November 06, 2016, 11:56:30 AM »
And which is fundamentally unfair, still, because 90% of what a poorer person makes is a hell of a lot less than 90% of someone that makes millions. The percentage cut you'd need to take to make up a fair budget would remove a huge fraction of what poorer people earn, which at the current state of affairs would bring them to a point where they could not survive. In which case, you'd have to pay more benefits, which have to be paid for somehow, so you'd have to raise taxes again, bringing more people down... Whereas the rich would barely notice, because they have plenty of buffer.
I have no idea what you are attempting to communicate with this. It is not fundamentally unfair because 10 percent is 10 percent. Of course the actual number amount will be lower or higher. As long as the percentage stays the same it is all gravy

You would actually get more money in with this, as right now only about a quarter of the populous pays positive income tax. This would be an example of fundamentally unfair. Enact the 10/15 percent plan along with the other changes I have already stated to the economy, you would have a very nice playing field where inflation/cost of living/wages are all proportional to each other, snipping under employment in the ass even for relatively simple jobs.
Quote
Because, like I've said several times before, the cost of living is basically fixed. Cost of food, energy, mortgage/rent, there'll be some subtle variation but in general that's fixed at, say, $1000.
If you make $1000, taking 10% screws you. If you make $10,000, you could take 50% and you'd be fine.

10% means something completely different to a poor person, vs anyone rich or middling.
If you want to talk about fundamentally unfair, increasing your percentage because you make more is. For reasons i have already stated. As usual it comes down to the same rhetoric "they can afford so take it", I have already stated what path this leads to.

Quote
We've moved on. For starters, the whole notion of "You get out what you put in," is nonsense. There's about an 80/90% component of dumb luck. Be born in the right place, have access to the right kinds of jobs, be skilled at the necessary things...
If this is your view it explains alot, and I kinda feel a little bad for you and I really think this mentality will greatly hinder you. Sure there is luck involved in things, but the high majority is hard work and determination. Get knocked down, come right back swinging. Some days are one step forward, two back..then you have those days 5 steps forward and none back.

Sure someone whom has a family such as Trump's that can loan you a million to start up a business, sure thats nice and take advantage of it. That is also the dream of any good father or mother, to have an inheritance to pass to your children to hopefully help them skip some steps in life. The inheritance is from what?? Hard work of the previous generation.

For example..when I got the Lockheed account some time back, it was by "dumb luck" I was able to speak to the director and sell myself for a trial run. It was not "dumb luck" I had the credentials, experience, and customer base for business references to actually get the deal. That was a little luck mixed with a ton of hard work.

Sure someone cant help where they are from, or situation they are born into. However, anywhere you are and whatever situation you are in...hard work, determination and creativity will reward you. May not reward you with millions all the time but it will set you ahead. Anywhere from someone in Haiti, to Baron Trump.



Quote
Laziness should not be a capital crime.
But sure, let's look at your example. They go a while, get the urge to work, and... what then? They'd likely have a fair gap in their resume, they'd be pretty unskilled, and be in poor physical shape. There comes a point of no return. It'll take them longer than most to get a job, even if anywhere's hiring, and they'd probably lose their house in the mean time, which further narrows their prospects because most places want hygiene (showers aren't easy to access on the street) and a home address. They can fight all they want, but at a certain point hope's more or less gone.

"You get what you put in" is not how the real world works, nor can it work. The only way you can remove the dominant component of dumb luck is to at least try to even the playing field, which takes steps like healthcare, benefits which include those struggling to find work, funded by taxing the people who can afford to give it (not a punishment for earning money, 'as a duty to the country they loved' to use your ideal), and all the things you dismiss as socialism.

Laziness is a "death sentence" in the real world though. You just don't realize that as you are so accustomed to having family protection and government protection that this reality does not compute. Family protection is a blessing and government protection is a luxury afforded by others labor. Neither is guaranteed.

You cannot live life assuming your meal will come from somewhere and someone will have your back. If this is your luck in life, then great, but in reality, the only person you can count on for anything is yourself and life is fight or die. I hope you always have family and friends to help and support you, and I hope your government is always solvent and supportive. Though you must never forget life is work, and life is not guaranteed. It sucks but it is what it is.

Forgetting this is just another building block into the eventual mentality of self entitlement.

Also....you are making a common mistake a wide eyed and bushy tailed young person makes. Thinking we are different, you are always saying "we have evolved"...no we haven't, this is also the number one reason history keeps repeating itself. Arrogance of people living thinking we are better or different than our ancestors. We are just the same now as 2k years ago and beyond.


Read George Washington's Memoirs and journals, read scholars text from 2k years ago etc etc. You will see we are all the same, talk the same, have the same problems and so forth. Sure they didn't have the "exact same problems", but they were the same. Disease, tyranny, moral, infrastructure, taxes, health, money etc etc...and they were very very intelligent even without an I pad.

Their main reason for recording history was the same reason a parent leaves an inheritance...to help the future skip a step. Also so we don't keep letting history repeat itself. This was a very big deal for Washington just as an example.

So the "old ideas" you shit on because you are "new and improved", is false. It has been proven they work, fought for because they do work. They fall apart because corruption is allowed in during a juncture somewhere and it erodes. Not because the idea didn't work. History tells us so many answers, I feel bad ignoring my history teacher in middle school, as history is just as important or more so than any other subject.


I have also already proposed plans to help people that want to work and better themselves but lack skills. So I won't bother to reiterate what I've said a few times already there.

In closing to your last statement even though I addressed the subject in the beginning, life is what you put in is what you get. Sure it may not make you a millionaire Everytime, it will always be proportional to where and what you are. Preaching your message is dangerous and hinders people...because why do anything in this view of life?

It's all luck anyways right? Plus, even if you hit the jackpot with some luck, most of your rewards will be taken from you and given to the "unlucky" anyways so what's the point. If I lived in this reality I would just sleep all day. Wouldn't have to worry about food because I am sure some idiot somewhere is dumb enough to do some work, so I will get some hand outs from there. This is why socialism does not work(the mentality of all luck just adds on to the despare), the ones that strive after a while say screw it, no point .

I find it interesting, EVERY successful person I deal with or have met believe in "you reep what you sow", and they all prove its true. They also have shit for luck, and most came from literally nothing as I. My luck is absolutely horrendous as well. The only thing we all share in common is that view, and the fact no matter what attacked, just kept trudging forward. Sometimes for the worse and beat to shit, but still moving....life is tough and no one gets out alive.


All I can say is, again I 100% agree. I can not find one thing to argue with.

I would like to add something. As a person responsible for hiring and firing people, I find that people who share my views and believe you reap what you sow; tend to do better at work, get hired easily, keep their jobs more often  and progress faster to the top than those who believe in hand outs and entitlement.   
« Last Edit: November 06, 2016, 12:04:39 PM by getrealzommb »

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #125 on: November 06, 2016, 02:43:08 PM »
All I can say is, again I 100% agree. I can not find one thing to argue with.

I would like to add something. As a person responsible for hiring and firing people, I find that people who share my views and believe you reap what you sow; tend to do better at work, get hired easily, keep their jobs more often  and progress faster to the top than those who believe in hand outs and entitlement.

A very good example and thank you for the input. This just goes along with everything I and people like myself have observed and experienced.

About the only places you will find success and the liberal mind set is in entertainment because they must walk that rope, their paycheck depends on it. Tim Allen is one of the few who is in the entertainment industry that denounces the non sense, and he gets crap for it all the time.

You will also find a few "fake" liberals very high up on the food chain. Not because they believe in it, but because its good for their company's bottom line and their obvious pocket book. For reasons i have stated earlier in this thread, liberal nonsensical rhetoric ans actions benefits monster multi corp llcs (such as Walmart, or coca cola) more than even the people getting the free ride.

Imagine a system of bad ideas that keeps your cost of payroll at stagnant, ridiculous low numbers compared to the sky rocketing inflation and cost of living. That is a God send to them...all for free.

So companies such as that, they are the ones that form the super PACs, and insert lobbyists to keep the people they need in their seat. Small investment for such a big return...also why someone who makes 110k a year salary in their "seat" comes out worth millions and millions...i wish I had a job like that.."magic math"

All the while the media and generalized perspective you are demonized for disagreeing with is forming our younger generations who are our "future" into brainless baby birds jumping in the nest waiting for mom to return with some food. Not to mention, remove the ability for critical thought...

It is the perfect employee and the perfect business model. People that will work for pennies because the government makes up the rest...lack critical thought and reasoning skills, so they are basically a "drone" that will do whatever for pennies....all the while the company is still raising their products price, cost of living keeps going up and inflation is out of control while their wages stays the same or actually lowers...

FANTASTIC....Another victory for the liberal mindset ::)
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #126 on: November 06, 2016, 04:06:46 PM »
I have no idea what you are attempting to communicate with this. It is not fundamentally unfair because 10 percent is 10 percent. Of course the actual number amount will be lower or higher. As long as the percentage stays the same it is all gravy

You would actually get more money in with this, as right now only about a quarter of the populous pays positive income tax. This would be an example of fundamentally unfair. Enact the 10/15 percent plan along with the other changes I have already stated to the economy, you would have a very nice playing field where inflation/cost of living/wages are all proportional to each other, snipping under employment in the ass even for relatively simple jobs.

If you want to talk about fundamentally unfair, increasing your percentage because you make more is. For reasons i have already stated. As usual it comes down to the same rhetoric "they can afford so take it", I have already stated what path this leads to.
You've made a slippery slope argument. There's a reason that's a fallacy.
Equal treatment is not inherently fairness. That's what comes of the oversimplification you seem fond of. Equal treatment is only fair when people have an equal starting point, which is never the case. You cannot just ignore every explanation and illustration I give, just to repeat the "10% is 10%" rhetoric.
People live based on how much money they have, not what percentage they have.
The facts are simple:

Taxing people an equal amount will either not make enough to fund services, or will kill the people that make less.
If a higher percentage has to be taken from some people, which it does, it has to be the rich.

End of.

Quote
If this is your view it explains alot, and I kinda feel a little bad for you and I really think this mentality will greatly hinder you. Sure there is luck involved in things, but the high majority is hard work and determination. Get knocked down, come right back swinging. Some days are one step forward, two back..then you have those days 5 steps forward and none back.

Sure someone whom has a family such as Trump's that can loan you a million to start up a business, sure thats nice and take advantage of it. That is also the dream of any good father or mother, to have an inheritance to pass to your children to hopefully help them skip some steps in life. The inheritance is from what?? Hard work of the previous generation.
And it's luck to be born to a family that worked hard.
And grow up. That's not how the real world works, at all. It might be how you want it to work, but it isn't the case. Work as hard as you can, you'll still just be a cog in a machine and if your company goes bust, you're screwed. If you're in a bad area, if you get ill, if you can't afford an education, if you end up against a better worker, if you need repairs... you're screwed.

Quote
For example..when I got the Lockheed account some time back, it was by "dumb luck" I was able to speak to the director and sell myself for a trial run. It was not "dumb luck" I had the credentials, experience, and customer base for business references to actually get the deal. That was a little luck mixed with a ton of hard work.

Sure someone cant help where they are from, or situation they are born into. However, anywhere you are and whatever situation you are in...hard work, determination and creativity will reward you. May not reward you with millions all the time but it will set you ahead. Anywhere from someone in Haiti, to Baron Trump.
No, it won't. That isn't how reality works.



Quote
Laziness is a "death sentence" in the real world though. You just don't realize that as you are so accustomed to having family protection and government protection that this reality does not compute. Family protection is a blessing and government protection is a luxury afforded by others labor. Neither is guaranteed.
I didn't say  it isn't, I said it shouldn't be.

Quote
You cannot live life assuming your meal will come from somewhere and someone will have your back. If this is your luck in life, then great, but in reality, the only person you can count on for anything is yourself and life is fight or die. I hope you always have family and friends to help and support you, and I hope your government is always solvent and supportive. Though you must never forget life is work, and life is not guaranteed. It sucks but it is what it is.

Forgetting this is just another building block into the eventual mentality of self entitlement.

Also....you are making a common mistake a wide eyed and bushy tailed young person makes. Thinking we are different, you are always saying "we have evolved"...no we haven't, this is also the number one reason history keeps repeating itself. Arrogance of people living thinking we are better or different than our ancestors. We are just the same now as 2k years ago and beyond.


Read George Washington's Memoirs and journals, read scholars text from 2k years ago etc etc. You will see we are all the same, talk the same, have the same problems and so forth. Sure they didn't have the "exact same problems", but they were the same. Disease, tyranny, moral, infrastructure, taxes, health, money etc etc...and they were very very intelligent even without an I pad.

Their main reason for recording history was the same reason a parent leaves an inheritance...to help the future skip a step. Also so we don't keep letting history repeat itself. This was a very big deal for Washington just as an example.

So the "old ideas" you shit on because you are "new and improved", is false. It has been proven they work, fought for because they do work. They fall apart because corruption is allowed in during a juncture somewhere and it erodes. Not because the idea didn't work. History tells us so many answers, I feel bad ignoring my history teacher in middle school, as history is just as important or more so than any other subject.


I have also already proposed plans to help people that want to work and better themselves but lack skills. So I won't bother to reiterate what I've said a few times already there.

In closing to your last statement even though I addressed the subject in the beginning, life is what you put in is what you get. Sure it may not make you a millionaire Everytime, it will always be proportional to where and what you are. Preaching your message is dangerous and hinders people...because why do anything in this view of life?

It's all luck anyways right? Plus, even if you hit the jackpot with some luck, most of your rewards will be taken from you and given to the "unlucky" anyways so what's the point. If I lived in this reality I would just sleep all day. Wouldn't have to worry about food because I am sure some idiot somewhere is dumb enough to do some work, so I will get some hand outs from there. This is why socialism does not work(the mentality of all luck just adds on to the despare), the ones that strive after a while say screw it, no point .

I find it interesting, EVERY successful person I deal with or have met believe in "you reep what you sow", and they all prove its true. They also have shit for luck, and most came from literally nothing as I. My luck is absolutely horrendous as well. The only thing we all share in common is that view, and the fact no matter what attacked, just kept trudging forward. Sometimes for the worse and beat to shit, but still moving....life is tough and no one gets out alive.

Denying that a lot of life's based on luck is just self-delusion. The majority of the very wealthy inherited it, and once you've inherited a lot you can just invest and live off the interest. Above a certain amount of money, there's no realistic way you can lose it. That is luck. The majority of the wealthy preach the "you reap what you sow," message when they themselves didn't, and're just heading off the complaints people would have.
The laziest person in the world could be born to wealth, and would live a long, luxurious life. The hardest worker in the world could be born to poverty, and if they even survive long enough, and escape illness, if they work hard enough to get a scholarship (of which there are a limited amount, so it isn't open to many people), and they have an aptitude for the right subjects, and if they manage a good uni, and work hard enough to get a good degree (all the while avoiding illness, or familial trouble that might lead to them needing to leave), then they'll still need to find a company near them, that'll hire someone who likely won't be able to afford transportation, who goes to an interview in likely shabbier clothes than others, who might have to face off against certain prejudices... If they go through all that, and come out well, and their company doesn't have financial issues, and on top of being a dedicated worker they're suitably sociable and happen to get on well with the people that already work there, then they might stand a chance, but it'd still be a struggle, and most people couldn't make most of that.
And you shouldn't expect someone to have to go through all of that to just survive, and work that hard, when someone by sheer luck born to a different family can coast through it, not needing a scholarship, not worrying about illness, having transportation, and maybe even familial connections to get a uni/job.

The whole "Work hard enough, you'll get ahead," is the line CEOs and the like use to keep people in check. If they fail, if they get fired, it's their fault, not the CEO's. If someone's struggling, it's their own fault, they could just work harder, who needs empathy?
That's the rhetoric that benefits abusive companies: make people blame themselves for their difficulties, rather than the actual issues.

Work helps, but you need a solid enough starting point and open enough market for it to hold, which doesn't exist. And after all that, even leaving aside the difficulties with education, you can still be cut off by a prat whose dad's college friends with the manager.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20637
  • Or should I?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #127 on: November 06, 2016, 04:52:41 PM »
Fair point, having rich parents help.

Working hard can turn your life around, even without privilige imo. I have plenty of mates who can't get off the dole and other mates who run two or three businesses. We all came from a similar sociodemographic.

I actually had to pick myself up from homelessness before (due to a lot of issues) without family support, and as you stated, a broken welfare system.

I got a job and managed to stay between friends couches the back of an old van and hostels, it was a shit job but eventually I found better ones, once I was reasonably secure again I could  rent a place and start learning and improving my resume.

Now I have what would be considered a good job with a generous wage and benefits, next year I am planning to study part time while working full time so I can have an easier time in my late 30's and 40's.

I moved out of home when I was 16, have had no support since then.
Now I work in a specialised industry that people are screaming for people that can actually do the job, I could work anywhere in Australia and plenty of other countries with my experience.

I am still not happy with it, that is why I plan to spend my free time and money studying.

I'm not taking sides here but if you want something you have to fight for it, rolling over and expecting hand outs because you are disadvantaged never helped anyone imo.

However I do hear comments from polliticians like "if you can't afford a house your parents should buy you your first house" and feel sick.

Yeah right mate.

Also the five week wait on the dole for under 25's in Australia, honestly people starve in five weeks with no food, they would only steal to eat if they couldn't get a job or government assistance. (I did)
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #128 on: November 06, 2016, 05:00:51 PM »
Quote
For example..when I got the Lockheed account some time back, it was by "dumb luck" I was able to speak to the director and sell myself for a trial run. It was not "dumb luck" I had the credentials, experience, and customer base for business references to actually get the deal. That was a little luck mixed with a ton of hard work.

Sure someone cant help where they are from, or situation they are born into. However, anywhere you are and whatever situation you are in...hard work, determination and creativity will reward you. May not reward you with millions all the time but it will set you ahead. Anywhere from someone in Haiti, to Baron Trump.

This is how it works rather you want to run blinders to it or not.....liberals are the only people who will disagree with this because they are used to running on someone else's dime.

I also stated success is relative to the who and what...I am not saying the "reap what you sow" mentality will make you an instant millionaire...it is relative to the who and what.

Someone who came from millions....maybe they will turn that into billions. Someone from Haiti, maybe it means their gourde grows 20 percent more than the others who don't bust ass. Or perhaps they have a months worth supply of food and water at all times instead of day by day and missing meals.

It's all relative, but the result is still the same.

And of course someone who busts ass will hit trouble from time to time. Even lose a business etc, I never said that wouldn't happen. I even ended my last message with how that is handled. You just keep plowing ahead, rebuild, reinvent, learn from the failure and you will succeed.

Fyi...most wealthy who preach "you reap what you sow"..they have came from nothing and show the words coming from their mouth to be true by action not by theory.

Paris Hilton which is the prime example of rich entitlement, she is a liberal. Interesting that is her mind set since she was given all she has.

Yes...your college example is annoying but it is what it is. You think I enjoyed putting myself through college wrapping wire in a plant at night to pay for it while others partied since everything was paid for by parents or the state? No...but who am I to judge, if someone's parents busted ass to get where they are to be able to afford those luxuries for their child, then great! Gives me more motivation to succeed and be like that.

There will always be those that come from nothing and explode to something, and there will always be those that take an inheritance and squander it to bankruptcy. What is the similarity here??? Both done by the actions or that person, "reaping what they sow"..

As for taxes and the playing field...you keep ignoring what I repeatedly state about leveling the playing field. The things that need to happen to level it naturally, to give everyone a shot for a chance at a decent life by their own doing. I recognize the system is broke, and I have stated the things that need to happen to fix it. The system used to be set up to give all a fair shot, now it isn't. .it can still be rebuilt back to the old standard as well as adding new abilities from things we have learned through just the last century to make it even better than before.

The liberal agenda will further decline it, further turn our future generations into brainless, spineless "go with the flow" people lacking any sort of critical/personal thinking skills... further plummet the economy, stop advancement and further expand the gap between the .01 percent that runs things and the peasants....through malice or through well meaning accident, this will become the outcome.

This is "fact" as you like to say...I have history to back me on this
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #129 on: November 06, 2016, 05:16:52 PM »
Fair point, having rich parents help.

Working hard can turn your life around, even without privilige imo. I have plenty of mates who can't get off the dole and other mates who run two or three businesses. We all came from a similar sociodemographic.

I actually had to pick myself up from homelessness before (due to a lot of issues) without family support, and as you stated, a broken welfare system.

I got a job and managed to stay between friends couches the back of an old van and hostels, it was a shit job but eventually I found better ones, once I was reasonably secure again I could  rent a place and start learning and improving my resume.

Now I have what would be considered a good job with a generous wage and benefits, next year I am planning to study part time while working full time so I can have an easier time in my late 30's and 40's.

I moved out of home when I was 16, have had no support since then.
Now I work in a specialised industry that people are screaming for people that can actually do the job, I could work anywhere in Australia and plenty of other countries with my experience.

I am still not happy with it, that is why I plan to spend my free time and money studying.

I'm not taking sides here but if you want something you have to fight for it, rolling over and expecting hand outs because you are disadvantaged never helped anyone imo.

However I do hear comments from polliticians like "if you can't afford a house your parents should buy you your first house" and feel sick.

Yeah right mate.

Also the five week wait on the dole for under 25's in Australia, honestly people starve in five weeks with no food, they would only steal to eat if they couldn't get a job or government assistance. (I did)

Just another fantastic example of fight or die. He chose to fight...if he had chosen not to and just rolled over to take the hand outs (not super familiar with Australian law, so i really dont know how liberal they are there)..

Actually let's put him in America so I can be accurate. Let's say in his time of hardship (I know the couch roll, I did that from 16 to 19, I could afford college rent AND food lol, so one had to give, did barters for mechanical repairs for a couch, or sometimes if lucky an actual bed) anyways in his time of hardship, if he just rolled and took the hand outs....do you really think he would be where he is now?

In a position of success, and now going to further his knowledge more so he can plan ahead for the years to come.....no way.

He also said something interesting about employment....he could get a job anywhere of his profession. I believe it, because the hard workers find employment fast...it is interesting seeing the workforce quality has declined in in Australia as well.

I as an employer, and every person I know who is an employer themselves agree, you can't find good help these days. Over the last 8 years, the workforce has gone to shit. You literally have to high five someone for just showing up to work. Used to that was a damn given.

I along with everyone I know will literally pay close to double the going rate for someone if they are a hard working honest employee....just can't find them!! So the jobs are there, people have just become to lazy to work for them.

Just another example of the lovely sense of entitlement....this has increased a plethora of percentage  over the last 8 years in the employment world.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #130 on: November 06, 2016, 05:32:57 PM »
Yeah, let's just leave aside your silly paranoia about what 'the liberals' are going to do, given that it never bears any resemblance to what anyone's proposing.

Let's look take a look at a non-existent ideal world. Prospective employers aren't going to be put off by being unable to afford transport, familial connections aren't vital to everything, the place you live doesn't determine the kind of education and job you have access to, there's no prejudice... And let's pretend that a good degree is all you need to get a job that can support you.
Let's focus strictly on working hard to get what you need.

Let's begin with a more stereotypically average middle class individual. They won't really need a part time job throughout school and college to get by, though they may take one over the holidays or at weekends. It's optional though. They get filling meals, and then go back to their room, sit down, and work hard over weekdays and likely most weekends.

Now, let's take a person from a lower income family. They'll likely need multiple part time jobs to support themselves, while constantly worrying about money. Some days they might not be able to eat, or at least not eat a more filling meal, in order to budget. They have to fit in time to revise and study in between their multiple jobs, under constant stress about money, and while hungry.

Both realistic, existing people. The level of hard work required for the same goal is vastly different, and quite frankly we should not expect the latter from anyone. That's just sadistic.
There is no such thing as everyone having a fair shot, unless everyone begins from the same starting point, and is treated the same way. That's not some radical liberal opinion, that's common sense.
There's no question that some people do succeed, and work hard. So? That's just a perfect situation for confirmation bias, in the rare occasion someone who worked hard and didn't succeed speaks up and has a platform to be heard, you'd just assume they hadn't worked that hard and that they were whining.

Instead of picking random individual cases, think about the facts. The whole idea hard work = success and that luck isn't a factor (noting that you have completely ignore how illnesses etc can wipe out a person's chances unless they're well-off, and you're just asking people to pick themselves up from nothing multiple times which isn't going to be possible without a safety net) is ludicrous.

And even if you can concoct a system, or imagine a world, where working hard will give you success, the amount of work drastically varies, and again, is fundamentally unfair to the lower income families, who you seem to enjoy wilfully walking all over.

Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #131 on: November 06, 2016, 07:18:34 PM »
I think it would be better if the minimum wage didn't exist at all, and companies felt free to adjust wages as needed rather than layoff half of the employees. Workers are smart enough to quit if they get screwed for no reason.
I wonder how obnoxious I can make my signature?
Please give me ideas.

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 14710
  • Intelligence Officer
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #132 on: November 06, 2016, 07:50:20 PM »
Fairness isn't a good goal when it comes to deciding tax burden.  A fair tax would be everyone paying the same amount, not the same percentage but the same dollar amount.  This, of course, would be impractical.  It would annihilate the poor and the government still wouldn't have enough to operate.  It would lead to desperate poor people, a dwindling middle class and an upper class that's panicked and hoards money defensively because the world's best customers(the American middle class) would be an endangered species. 

A better goal would be what makes society work the best.  We need support for the poor.  A middle class that's accessible to everyone.  And an upper class still able to run businesses.  To achieve this we need a tax strategy that's very unfair but produces a situation that benefits everyone.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 14710
  • Intelligence Officer
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #133 on: November 06, 2016, 08:06:41 PM »
I think it would be better if the minimum wage didn't exist at all, and companies felt free to adjust wages as needed rather than layoff half of the employees. Workers are smart enough to quit if they get screwed for no reason.

In theory I kind of agree.  In practice however, the problem is that negotiations for these things tend to be very lopsided.  Someone applies for a job at a company.  He's very good at doing a specific thing.  The company however has lots of people that are very good at doing many different things, including negotiation and collusion with other employers and collusion with the government.  I don't mean to paint all employers with a broad brush as villains but this country has a long history of some very nasty abuses that big businesses have waged on the common man. 

Ideally the free market would prevail and guarantee a good work situation.  Doesn't work out that way in real life so we have things like OSHA, the EPA, a 40 hour work week, minimum wage, maybe even one day guaranteed maternity leave.  These are all hard fought worker's rights with an interesting history behind.  It would definitely be worth your time to research the history of labor in America and why these programs exist.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #134 on: November 06, 2016, 08:18:49 PM »
40 hour work week. Haha.

In my summer job (lifeguard) we were always sooo understaffed, so I was able to get 70 hour workweeks most of the time, and even a 92 hour workweek one week. I can imagine Ho I conflicted my manager was, mad that he had to pay me 4 digits per week, but glad that he didn't have to close pools down.

All my coworkers thought I was crazy, but i don't really have a life, so I didn't care.
I wonder how obnoxious I can make my signature?
Please give me ideas.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #135 on: November 06, 2016, 08:27:36 PM »
40 hour work week. Haha.

In my summer job (lifeguard) we were always sooo understaffed, so I was able to get 70 hour workweeks most of the time, and even a 92 hour workweek one week. I can imagine Ho I conflicted my manager was, mad that he had to pay me 4 digits per week, but glad that he didn't have to close pools down.

All my coworkers thought I was crazy, but i don't really have a life, so I didn't care.

Most of that overtime money should have been distributed among the other lifeguards who were not mentally or physically capable of working the same number of hours as you were. 

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #136 on: November 06, 2016, 09:00:45 PM »
40 hour work week. Haha.

In my summer job (lifeguard) we were always sooo understaffed, so I was able to get 70 hour workweeks most of the time, and even a 92 hour workweek one week. I can imagine Ho I conflicted my manager was, mad that he had to pay me 4 digits per week, but glad that he didn't have to close pools down.

All my coworkers thought I was crazy, but i don't really have a life, so I didn't care.

Most of that overtime money should have been distributed among the other lifeguards who were not mentally or physically capable of working the same number of hours as you were.
Ha ha ha!!! This is probably one of the most epic things I have ever seen you post jroa. Way to sum up the nonsense that I have been arguing against.

Fairness isn't a good goal when it comes to deciding tax burden.  A fair tax would be everyone paying the same amount, not the same percentage but the same dollar amount.  This, of course, would be impractical.  It would annihilate the poor and the government still wouldn't have enough to operate.  It would lead to desperate poor people, a dwindling middle class and an upper class that's panicked and hoards money defensively because the world's best customers(the American middle class) would be an endangered species. 

A better goal would be what makes society work the best.  We need support for the poor.  A middle class that's accessible to everyone.  And an upper class still able to run businesses.  To achieve this we need a tax strategy that's very unfair but produces a situation that benefits everyone.


Well obviously everyone should not pay the same amount, that would nuke everyone but the high upper middle class and above.

However, what is wrong with a straight 10 percent personal 15 percent business tax? As of right now only a quarter of the populous pays positive taxes, while 45 percent receives positive taxes....that is unsustainable, hence the 20 trillion dollar debt.

People making 1700 dollars a month and beyond will already be "saving " money on taxes. Yet at the same time the states will actually be collecting many times more revenue.

Same with businesses, small and medium businesses will save a ton which will free them up to expand. Large super corps will lose their tax holes and lobbyists built holes, carried interest, junk "investment bonds" used to hide banking "gifts" as income during a loss etc etc.

Again, the savings goes where it needs, the playing field is leveled tax wise, and actual revenue to the government will rise.

Not to mention being able to move 3 quarters or the IRS workers to other parts or infrastructure.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2016, 09:05:40 PM by Babyhighspeed »
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #137 on: November 06, 2016, 10:14:11 PM »
As to Jane....your last post..is that a new argument or just a copy and paste omitting all my rebuttals?

I have said many times success is proportionate to where and what you are. Even given examples of a billionaire to someone in Haiti and anywhere in between. Still it provides positive results.

I have also already trumped you "lucky" argument as well.

Also giving examples of the "poor person that has to bust his ass through college" etc...you give this when you have 3 people who have posted brief stories about ones self (dispute,getrealzombie, and myself) that did just that. We were those "poor people" that had to kill it to succeed. Wasn't the most fun and quite stressful, though I personally wouldn't trade it for anything, and I have a feeling neither dispute nor getreal would either. It gives me experience that someone who has always been "flush" might not have, and you definitely learn how to Hussle. As dispute said, he has even been forced to steal food before...but he came through and look at him now.

Plus, I know if I went belly up and someone who has always been flush went belly up, they would be shell shocked and lost. I already taught myself and been through living in a 20 square foot area, one pair of pants, 2 t shirts and one pair of shoes washing myself in a sink lmao!! Takes away some of your dignity for sure, but sure does increase motivation.

Also you say "these people worked hard...so??" How arrogant is that? People who over come should inspire people, provide motivation for those in the middle of the struggle, realizing there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

Alot more motivating than saying "boy look at all these people who have busted their ass to support me" ha ha..


Speaking of "ignoring"...you completely glanced over what I have said about helping people who "can't do from medical or mental disabilities"...I have said this many times. Even though as I have also stated, I have met many "disabled" people who still bust ass and do well for themselves even when they could ride the coat tale of the tax payer. They choose not to.

I have also said I agree in some form of un employment for a person that is in between a job. Also...I have said I completely agree in the state assisting in education. History has shown that is one of the best investments a government can make for itself and it's people.

I don't need to "concoct" a working model of a government. It has already been built and shown to be fruitful. It is called a republic. History has shown that it works. It sounds much more intelligent to listen to history saying something is fruitful instead of listening to rhetoric that history has said failed EVERY TIME...

Not to mention when it has already failed right in front of our eyes, not even a need to look through history.


Well as I said, there really is nothing new in your rebuttal...surely nothing that negates the fact of "you reep what you sow"...

Soo???





« Last Edit: November 06, 2016, 10:20:58 PM by Babyhighspeed »
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #138 on: November 07, 2016, 02:25:07 AM »
I'll put an example based on what the market I know can offer me.

Renting a single room (not an apartment, a room, and a small one): 300
Food, aiming at the cheapest (pasta, potatoes, rice, chicken, etc.): 200
Bills (electrical, water, natural gas, phone, etc): 100

The minimum wage in Spain is 655, which barely covers the basic needs. A 10% would leave me with 589.5, which is already less than I need to sustain this meager lifestyle, and we're not taking into consideration what I could spend on transportation (142 every 3 months. Public transportation, of course. Forget about getting a car, the cheapest second hand one is two or three times the minimum wage), medication (healthcare is free in Spain, but you still need to buy whatever pills you need), education (professional courses are at about 400-500, and university is, of course, more expensive than that) and many one time only expenses that may become necessary, like a new bed, repairs for an old computer, etc.

So, a 10% tax would really screw me. A rich individual wouldn't even flinch, and most possibly would rather try to work the system to avoid paying them because... I don't know. He may think he's better than those poor mooches and decide he's not going to sustain their sorry ass.

So no, a 10% tax for everyone is absolutely worthless and would only further the distance between the rich and poor, no matter how hard anyone works.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #139 on: November 07, 2016, 07:02:47 AM »
I think it would be better if the minimum wage didn't exist at all, and companies felt free to adjust wages as needed rather than layoff half of the employees. Workers are smart enough to quit if they get screwed for no reason.
Not always an option. In a bad job market, where someone would struggle getting a job, they'd need to stay with even a bad one because something's better than nothing.
A minimum wage is necessary to stop jobs taking advantage of people desperate for work.

As to Jane....your last post..is that a new argument or just a copy and paste omitting all my rebuttals?

I have said many times success is proportionate to where and what you are. Even given examples of a billionaire to someone in Haiti and anywhere in between. Still it provides positive results.

I have also already trumped you "lucky" argument as well.
No, you've ignored it. You're repeating what you have to know by now is complete nonsense.

But, sure, you've Trumped it. Nice phrasing.

Quote
Also you say "these people worked hard...so??" How arrogant is that? People who over come should inspire people, provide motivation for those in the middle of the struggle, realizing there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Welcome to the real world. Just because some people succeed doesn't mean everyone can, and the vastly different levels of what 'hard work' entails, which has nothing to do with the proportionate success, is fundamentally ridiculous.
The real world is not about what sounds cool or motivational.

Quote
Speaking of "ignoring"...you completely glanced over what I have said about helping people who "can't do from medical or mental disabilities"...I have said this many times. Even though as I have also stated, I have met many "disabled" people who still bust ass and do well for themselves even when they could ride the coat tale of the tax payer. They choose not to.
Moving, again, past your silly standards of fair work, I wasn't talking about disabled people. You don't need to be physically disabled to have medical difficulties.

Quote
Well as I said, there really is nothing new in your rebuttal...surely nothing that negates the fact of "you reep what you sow"...
I don't need to say anything new, because you never provided it. You ignore fact after fact, opting instead to focus on idealism and cool phrases, rather than brute fact.

Take your 10% tax. GlaringEye did the maths, but then there's the simple logic which you ignore.
People don't survive on a percentage of what they earn, shops don't sell "for 20% of what you made this week," they sell for raw amounts.
Charge a universal 10% tax, and the poorer die, and the rich won't notice because chances are they're never going to end up in their last 10% of money.
Instead, think of it like this: the tax the rich pay is the universal tax, there are just benefits to cover the people who will quite literally die if they spend it.

Take benefits. You said you've supported them, but you also imagine that you apparently can create a vetting system that no politician has ever thought of to reduce the number of people who abuse it. That system, if it exists, will take more money, and will be a constant investment. Likely won't save that much, especially if you need to err in the side of permissiveness. After all, you can't exactly ask a doctor because not everyone can afford one.

Your entire view on what'll help your country is basically to rebuild it from the ground up. Let's ignore the abhorrent idea that the lazy deserve to die, let's pretend you can successfully change the personal philosophies of the people in the country, let's pretend the entitlement you so decry is just from laziness rather than a product of social factors, let's suppose it's even workable to fashion all the changes you need to get a suitable baseline.
You're still stuck with a woeful misunderstanding of what fairness is.
You're stuck with an education system you won't be able to fund, but even pretending you can and it's universally accessible, people still need to eat and find shelter when there. If they're all looked after, then it'll just become a new home for moochers. If they still need to pay for that, it's still biased towards the rich. If they need to achieve a certain standard of work, then congratulations you've just made a breeding ground for mental illness.
You're stuck with a tax system that'll wipe out the lower classes because even if you get everyone working nice and hard, there are only a finite amount of high-paying jobs and there will always need to be people who get by on the less skilled jobs, so they'll have to make less and your taxes will take away most of that, unless you introduce a higher minimum wage (which you also won't be able to afford). Meanwhile, the rich won't notice because it's basically just one less celebrity officiating their wedding.
And you're stuck with a job market that can only favour so many people.

The amount of work someone has to do to succeed is based entirely on luck; on the family they're in, the neighbourhood, whether or not illnesses occur, what jobs are nearly, the costs of apartments, what openings are available, whether those jobs fit their aptitudes...
"If you work harder, you'll make it," is not only false, but a completely insulting thing to say to someone in a bad situation, when the vast majority of people didn't need to work nearly as hard to get a much better life.
Sure, no doubt you can name a few people who worked their way up, sure you can probably even name disabled people who've pushed themselves to support themselves. That's impressive, yes. Leaving aside how much it would depend on circumstances beyond their control, it being impressive doesn't mean it's something we should expect from everyone. Not everyone is capable of the same things.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #140 on: November 07, 2016, 10:31:09 AM »
Yes I have given examples of how hard work "Trumps" luck..myself included there are three people who whom have shared their story of how you get dealt a difficult hand and over come it. Every successful person I frequent their company has the same story....it took alot of work, alot of blood but perseverance was achieved.

The only person I know that "came from money" (2.1 million at 19 from death of father) went completely bankrupt in 5 years because under his own words "he has the sense of entitlement and was an idiot"....guess what, he admitted his problem, snapped out of it, and within another 6 years, he was back in the green. That is alot of work, at least I started a 0, he started at a negative with nothing, that is hard work.

Every successful person (no they don't have to be millionaires to be successful) EVERY successful person I have met or frequent have the same mentality. You reap what you sow and no excuses...

EVERY sad case of failure has the exact same mentality....poor me, excuses, and gimmie because I am that great so I deserve it. These examples come from all sorts of social standings. I love meeting young people, they may be sleeping on a couch, but I will see that drive and no bullshit mentality...I will know they will be ok. They always are...

In many ways it is easier to to make it now than in the past thanks to this new sad mentality. The playing field is a bit more open for those that fight to do.

I have also stated the 10 percent /15 percent will need to follow in line with many other changes. Also yes, we need a "complete change", so what? If America were a private business it would have had its doors shut a decade ago (and be in jail)...so when you have a business malfunctioning, sometimes you need to complete overhaul. The private sector does that all the time.

Plus it is not even a "total overhaul", just a reboot, we have already been there once before....deleting things is much easier and quicker than building new. Complete these changes and minimum wage under employment will be a thing of the past.

Inflation, cost of living, and wages will all be proportional again....right now minimum wage is just a formality, pretty useless in the real world. Minimum wage before, you could at least live off of, that was the whole point. Yet it's percent was created way before cost of living, inflation and wages was non proportionally gapped.


Do you listen to yourself??? "You reap what you sow" is insulting to you?? Your mind set of "success is accidental" and if you reach this lottery somehow you gotta give it to everyone else is insulting and very unhealthy. It is painfully obvious by your bleak outlook the company you keep.(also I know you are in "liberal", college so that surely doesn't help)..Sitting around speaking of how we all are victims and we need to be compensated by somebody for something gets you no where but failure. Even if you can inch by in life with this mentality, you will be inching on someone else's dime.

You also speak about the real world?? Apparently I need to be "introduced to it"...talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I don't live in rainbow of unicorns and wizards where life is the same difficulty level for everyone, and heaven forbid someone should have a little difficulty or a hurt feeling they should be compensated by someone. I don't give two shits college was easier for someone who had their ride taken care of than for me. I built some unique qualities because of it.

Everyone I know with a similar story of strife, they all feel the exact same way, wouldn't trade it. Also it has always kept them grounded to the regular Joe no matter their social standing, they just don't except excuses. Sure there are liberals who will yell at them "you don't care about our struggle, our hurt feelings..now I need to to into my safe space right now, because I feel a little emotionally frazzled right now"....so what?????

No one gave a shit about my "hurt feelings" when I was having to shower in a sink and wash my two pairs of shirts and one pair of pants in that same sink. So what??? All I cared about was how to fit my 6'4 self kinda in the sink....it forced me to make a makeshift head at school and splice it into the main feed. It surely helped....didn't need a "safe space" to deal with it either.

With your mentality, I would truly feel for you if you lost family support and your nanny state protection. You would be introduced to the real world very harshly, and I would worry about you. Though something tells me you would adjust quickly, and your views of life would change equally as quick.


Finally....since you think you are stating absolute fact....let me help you with those (as it seems you are a little bit off)..

The liberal mentality is completely ass backwards...rewarding failure, bad ideas, immorality, and laziness....yet demonizing success, morality, and hard work....how in the world does this ass backwards Bizarro world have any chance if success. Surely liberals cant seriously believe it will work....or is that how dilited the mind has become? Or is it just some cruel joke that some one will finally come out and say "gotcha!!".

Liberals are supporting a system of government that has failed EVERYTIME in history...not just once or a couple EVERYTIME!! It has failed EVERYTIME in social experiments, even the most recent one the outreach tried with a group in Zimbabwe (it was meant to help, not just an experiment)...they tried the liberal approach and it failed in nine months with 240 people. Removed the "ass backwards" approach and it is a thriving town now that has tripled in population.

Following a known method that is a 100 percent guaranteed failure...how could such self proclaimed smart people think this will work? Though I suppose it goes along with the mentality, why not take a complete failure or a method and use it in a system where failure is rewarded.

Two nice ways to sum up where we are....Kaitlyn Jenner machine is a national hero, then real success and real heros are demonized....ha ha.. PASS

A world where we "don't keep score" because it will "hurt their feelings" (even though failure in any activity is a MUST for a young person, teaches them to bounce back, fight and win next time, very valuable in the real world)
PASS!

Another FACT for you....
One day either the nanny state will be become completely insolvent under its own weight and collapse....or the minority will call it quits in supporting the majority and either leave the country or just say screw it and jump on the free hand wagon. Will still cause the same collapse ....all money going out none coming in.

I hope this does not happen in your life time Jane...but history guarantees it will one day. Then the "reality" I am "so far disconnected" from might actually set in.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #141 on: November 07, 2016, 11:02:27 AM »
Instead of deciding what you'd like someone to be saying, and having fun with the narrative that can be created from that, how about looking at what's really being said?

Anecdotes don't show anything. Facts are more important than how a few people choose to present certain events in their lives, and the facts remain that luck dominates, as you consistently ignore. No one's saying working hard doesn't help, but it's hardly some magic cure.
But, sure, if you're going to make accusations about me, have my story. I lived with my mother, until my first year of uni when she died, so actually I have been supporting myself for the past three years, primarily with inheritance admittedly. I haven't been blowing through it, I've been careful, I've been sorting out most requirements (like moving) on top of uni work, and I'm doing just fine. No need for family support. Completed a first class BSc, chose to continue onto MSc.
The difference is, when I look at the bad parts of my life, my reaction is "People shouldn't have to go through that." It isn't "Well, I managed it, screw everyone else who has to the same."

Just look at your damn standards, they're based entirely on screwing over those unlucky enough to be born to lower-income families. Everything about your tax plan remains ridiculous, as you've been unable to mount any kind of defence. Everything about your "Word hard!" plan just places a burden on them which everyone else completely avoids.
That's undeniably an unfair burden to place on them, and here's the fun fact: the poor actually feel the burden placed on them. The rich you're so valiantly defending could pay a couple of thousand extra at least and still live basically the same life.

I have no issue with hard work. I have an issue with your idea which basically comes down to making people blame themselves if they didn't succeed, because that's just insulting.
Because luck is a fact for crying out loud, stop ignoring the facts in place of confirmation bias and anecdotes. Especially in the US. Get ill, you're screwed. need to look after family, you're screwed. Company goes bust? Screwed. Too poor a family to get a car or reliable transport? Screwed. Bad area for new jobs? Screwed. Work as hard as you want, you need to get into the right setting for it to work, and one bad streak brings you back to zero. Maybe someone could pull themselves out of it, but your way of thinking seems to be just to point at someone who's had a horrifically bad time, through no fault of their own, and telling them to work harder.
And that's just fucked up.

To remove the impact of luck, which your plan requires, you need what you dismiss idiotically as 'socialism,' complaining about niche isolated instances. Socialism is a massive umbrella term, you just decide the things that don't work are socialism and ignore the rest. The benefits you agree with? Pensions? They stem from socialism.
You need healthcare, you need the poorer to be looked after, and given access to things like college and higher education, you need benefits... if you even want a chance of your plan to working. So, guess what? You need a welfare state.
Otherwise all you're doing is increasing the problem.

If the traits you get from suffering and struggling for money are so vital, do away with inheritance, make everyone go through it.
Otherwise the basic fact that a lot of people have an easy ride, while others are struggling to eat, and then just complaining that the latter didn't work hard enough, is tremendously and fundamentally wrong.

*

getrealzommb

  • 894
  • We do actually live on a ball: But who cares?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #142 on: November 07, 2016, 11:07:14 AM »
Yes I have given examples of how hard work "Trumps" luck..myself included there are three people who whom have shared their story of how you get dealt a difficult hand and over come it. Every successful person I frequent their company has the same story....it took alot of work, alot of blood but perseverance was achieved.

The only person I know that "came from money" (2.1 million at 19 from death of father) went completely bankrupt in 5 years because under his own words "he has the sense of entitlement and was an idiot"....guess what, he admitted his problem, snapped out of it, and within another 6 years, he was back in the green. That is alot of work, at least I started a 0, he started at a negative with nothing, that is hard work.

Every successful person (no they don't have to be millionaires to be successful) EVERY successful person I have met or frequent have the same mentality. You reap what you sow and no excuses...

EVERY sad case of failure has the exact same mentality....poor me, excuses, and gimmie because I am that great so I deserve it. These examples come from all sorts of social standings. I love meeting young people, they may be sleeping on a couch, but I will see that drive and no bullshit mentality...I will know they will be ok. They always are...

In many ways it is easier to to make it now than in the past thanks to this new sad mentality. The playing field is a bit more open for those that fight to do.

I have also stated the 10 percent /15 percent will need to follow in line with many other changes. Also yes, we need a "complete change", so what? If America were a private business it would have had its doors shut a decade ago (and be in jail)...so when you have a business malfunctioning, sometimes you need to complete overhaul. The private sector does that all the time.

Plus it is not even a "total overhaul", just a reboot, we have already been there once before....deleting things is much easier and quicker than building new. Complete these changes and minimum wage under employment will be a thing of the past.

Inflation, cost of living, and wages will all be proportional again....right now minimum wage is just a formality, pretty useless in the real world. Minimum wage before, you could at least live off of, that was the whole point. Yet it's percent was created way before cost of living, inflation and wages was non proportionally gapped.


Do you listen to yourself??? "You reap what you sow" is insulting to you?? Your mind set of "success is accidental" and if you reach this lottery somehow you gotta give it to everyone else is insulting and very unhealthy. It is painfully obvious by your bleak outlook the company you keep.(also I know you are in "liberal", college so that surely doesn't help)..Sitting around speaking of how we all are victims and we need to be compensated by somebody for something gets you no where but failure. Even if you can inch by in life with this mentality, you will be inching on someone else's dime.

You also speak about the real world?? Apparently I need to be "introduced to it"...talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I don't live in rainbow of unicorns and wizards where life is the same difficulty level for everyone, and heaven forbid someone should have a little difficulty or a hurt feeling they should be compensated by someone. I don't give two shits college was easier for someone who had their ride taken care of than for me. I built some unique qualities because of it.

Everyone I know with a similar story of strife, they all feel the exact same way, wouldn't trade it. Also it has always kept them grounded to the regular Joe no matter their social standing, they just don't except excuses. Sure there are liberals who will yell at them "you don't care about our struggle, our hurt feelings..now I need to to into my safe space right now, because I feel a little emotionally frazzled right now"....so what?????

No one gave a shit about my "hurt feelings" when I was having to shower in a sink and wash my two pairs of shirts and one pair of pants in that same sink. So what??? All I cared about was how to fit my 6'4 self kinda in the sink....it forced me to make a makeshift head at school and splice it into the main feed. It surely helped....didn't need a "safe space" to deal with it either.

With your mentality, I would truly feel for you if you lost family support and your nanny state protection. You would be introduced to the real world very harshly, and I would worry about you. Though something tells me you would adjust quickly, and your views of life would change equally as quick.


Finally....since you think you are stating absolute fact....let me help you with those (as it seems you are a little bit off)..

The liberal mentality is completely ass backwards...rewarding failure, bad ideas, immorality, and laziness....yet demonizing success, morality, and hard work....how in the world does this ass backwards Bizarro world have any chance if success. Surely liberals cant seriously believe it will work....or is that how dilited the mind has become? Or is it just some cruel joke that some one will finally come out and say "gotcha!!".

Liberals are supporting a system of government that has failed EVERYTIME in history...not just once or a couple EVERYTIME!! It has failed EVERYTIME in social experiments, even the most recent one the outreach tried with a group in Zimbabwe (it was meant to help, not just an experiment)...they tried the liberal approach and it failed in nine months with 240 people. Removed the "ass backwards" approach and it is a thriving town now that has tripled in population.

Following a known method that is a 100 percent guaranteed failure...how could such self proclaimed smart people think this will work? Though I suppose it goes along with the mentality, why not take a complete failure or a method and use it in a system where failure is rewarded.

Two nice ways to sum up where we are....Kaitlyn Jenner machine is a national hero, then real success and real heros are demonized....ha ha.. PASS

A world where we "don't keep score" because it will "hurt their feelings" (even though failure in any activity is a MUST for a young person, teaches them to bounce back, fight and win next time, very valuable in the real world)
PASS!

Another FACT for you....
One day either the nanny state will be become completely insolvent under its own weight and collapse....or the minority will call it quits in supporting the majority and either leave the country or just say screw it and jump on the free hand wagon. Will still cause the same collapse ....all money going out none coming in.

I hope this does not happen in your life time Jane...but history guarantees it will one day. Then the "reality" I am "so far disconnected" from might actually set in.

Are you actually inside my head? This is a little freaky.... are you, in fact me?

Now that you have said everything I wanted to say; Can you please step out of my brain and politely leave it as you found it.

Bravo anyway
« Last Edit: November 07, 2016, 11:33:23 AM by getrealzommb »

Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #143 on: November 07, 2016, 11:56:26 AM »
The same taxes for everyone would destroy the welfare state. It's inherently unfair, immoral and against the spirit on which your country was founded. Poor people would irremediably struggle to stay alive after the taxes have left them with less money than they need to buy food. Rich people would lose less money on taxes, meaning the government doesn't have the funding to maintain the highroads network, nor the police, or the firefighters, not to talk about public education, public healthcare, etc. As the government can't sustain the welfare state, private companies will take over those services. But they're companies, so they charge for it. The poor, already struggling to stay alive, would be alienated as they would obviously be unable to pay for those services. The rich would get richer, not only because they barely pay taxes, but because their companies are in control of those basic services everyone has to pay for in order to be integrated in this new society.

And now you have, once again, a country dominated by an aristocracy while most citizens barely survive. Talk about going back in time.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #144 on: November 07, 2016, 12:23:46 PM »
The same taxes for everyone would destroy the welfare state. It's inherently unfair, immoral and against the spirit on which your country was founded. Poor people would irremediably struggle to stay alive after the taxes have left them with less money than they need to buy food. Rich people would lose less money on taxes, meaning the government doesn't have the funding to maintain the highroads network, nor the police, or the firefighters, not to talk about public education, public healthcare, etc. As the government can't sustain the welfare state, private companies will take over those services. But they're companies, so they charge for it. The poor, already struggling to stay alive, would be alienated as they would obviously be unable to pay for those services. The rich would get richer, not only because they barely pay taxes, but because their companies are in control of those basic services everyone has to pay for in order to be integrated in this new society.

And now you have, once again, a country dominated by an aristocracy while most citizens barely survive. Talk about going back in time.

And let's not forget that no amount of "Word hard," is going to get them out of that situation because the jobs that require less skill are just as vital to the country as the geniuses planning innovations and trades etc. The people who must exist, who must fill those jobs, and as a result must end up paid less, can't just 'reap what they sow' because the economy is a bit more complicated than a motivational poster. They're limited by the job they have, and they can't just get a new one because someone needs to fill that job.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5424
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #145 on: November 07, 2016, 01:28:12 PM »
And let's not forget that no amount of "Word hard," is going to get them out of that situation because the jobs that require less skill are just as vital to the country as the geniuses planning innovations and trades etc. The people who must exist, who must fill those jobs, and as a result must end up paid less, can't just 'reap what they sow' because the economy is a bit more complicated than a motivational poster. They're limited by the job they have, and they can't just get a new one because someone needs to fill that job.
This is pretty darn close to the kink in all the "hard work, start your own business" mentality.  There always HAS to be people to do the menial tasks, like cashiers, food service, janitors, etc. On top of this, every employer needs to have an available pool of potential employees to fill whatever role is needed, be it skilled or unskilled.

As bad as this sounds, we need unskilled people to fill the roles that those of us who trained in a skill or got a degree don't want to do anymore.  In order to keep people working these jobs, they need to be able to afford to live working them, which isn't possible given the minimum wage in the US.

If every single wage earner followed your advice to find a way to get a better station in life, they would get useless training because their would be such ridiculous competition for those spots that they would be stuck right back where they were with nothing to show of their training.  We would have a slew of fast food cooks that are qualified to do your taxes, hook up electricity in your house, build skyscrapers, but no where to apply those skills.

The moral of the story is, not everyone can make it up the ladder, so those of us who climb have an obligation to make sure those that don't are taken care of for their sacrifice that allowed us to climb.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

getrealzommb

  • 894
  • We do actually live on a ball: But who cares?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #146 on: November 07, 2016, 02:02:07 PM »
And let's not forget that no amount of "Word hard," is going to get them out of that situation because the jobs that require less skill are just as vital to the country as the geniuses planning innovations and trades etc. The people who must exist, who must fill those jobs, and as a result must end up paid less, can't just 'reap what they sow' because the economy is a bit more complicated than a motivational poster. They're limited by the job they have, and they can't just get a new one because someone needs to fill that job.
This is pretty darn close to the kink in all the "hard work, start your own business" mentality.  There always HAS to be people to do the menial tasks, like cashiers, food service, janitors, etc. On top of this, every employer needs to have an available pool of potential employees to fill whatever role is needed, be it skilled or unskilled.

As bad as this sounds, we need unskilled people to fill the roles that those of us who trained in a skill or got a degree don't want to do anymore.  In order to keep people working these jobs, they need to be able to afford to live working them, which isn't possible given the minimum wage in the US.

If every single wage earner followed your advice to find a way to get a better station in life, they would get useless training because their would be such ridiculous competition for those spots that they would be stuck right back where they were with nothing to show of their training.  We would have a slew of fast food cooks that are qualified to do your taxes, hook up electricity in your house, build skyscrapers, but no where to apply those skills.

The moral of the story is, not everyone can make it up the ladder, so those of us who climb have an obligation to make sure those that don't are taken care of for their sacrifice that allowed us to climb.

There are always ways to better yourself and climb the ladder. Where that ladder stops for you will always be from a combination of factors. Mental ability, Physical Ability, work ethic, drive and a little bit of luck.

For example someone who starts as a workshop laborer on minimum wage could progress to be a mechanical fitter over a few years. That may be his/her limit. Another candidate may progress further and become an engineer, His/her employer may see value in his skills and make him Chief Engineer. He/she may, in time go on to start his own business, or he may have reached his/her plateau.

A person may get hired as a cleaner in a supermarket, their employer notices that they are very hard working and able to do more promoting them to caretaker. Or a manager notices that they are good at answering customers questions (what isle is the dish soap please?) and give them a try at customer services. That might be the end of the progress, but the person could shine over time and an employer could see a good candidate for  them to become some kind of personnel officer.

 If a person is not able to progress from laborer/cleaner role, they have likely made a poor career choice and hasn't found a job that takes advantage of their strengths. They should move on and try something different.

There will always be a labor force, People who were unfortunate to do well in school for whatever reason and there will always be a ladder to clime, even if it takes a few side steps along the way.


The aim is to make the positions available to everyone. To do this you have to grow businesses and create jobs. you need an economy that favors upstarts and new businesses for them to to thrive and survive.

First of all we need to weed out the bad businesses and have the good ones survive by creating a protected free market.

Second is to reduce taxation and close tax loopholes.

Third is to lessen legislation that cripples small  and new business.

Forth is to shrink the financial burden that is the welfare state, shrink the government, and promote a good work ethic.

fifth is to rebuild infrastructure.

sixth Invest heavily in education and healthcare and maintain a strong economy.



« Last Edit: November 07, 2016, 02:25:20 PM by getrealzommb »

*

Denspressure

  • 1947
  • What do you, value?
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #147 on: November 07, 2016, 02:21:19 PM »
I prefer to stay out of any political chatter on the Internet... I am afraid it will ruin respect and relationships.

But I'm not from America... so I do not know how much impact different opinions on parties and ideologies affect relationships. Different cultures react differently to conflicting opinions.

FYI plenty of young people I've spoken with here think America is retarded because war, trump, caused war in the middle east.

We (as the nation I am part of) are currently working on a SHLLV to go together with the N-1 and Saturn V. It is a state secret, however.

Cheers!
« Last Edit: November 07, 2016, 02:29:38 PM by Denspressure »
):

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #148 on: November 07, 2016, 03:29:52 PM »
There are always ways to better yourself and climb the ladder. Where that ladder stops for you will always be from a combination of factors. Mental ability, Physical Ability, work ethic, drive and a little bit of luck.

For example someone who starts as a workshop laborer on minimum wage could progress to be a mechanical fitter over a few years. That may be his/her limit. Another candidate may progress further and become an engineer, His/her employer may see value in his skills and make him Chief Engineer. He/she may, in time go on to start his own business, or he may have reached his/her plateau.

A person may get hired as a cleaner in a supermarket, their employer notices that they are very hard working and able to do more promoting them to caretaker. Or a manager notices that they are good at answering customers questions (what isle is the dish soap please?) and give them a try at customer services. That might be the end of the progress, but the person could shine over time and an employer could see a good candidate for  them to become some kind of personnel officer.

 If a person is not able to progress from laborer/cleaner role, they have likely made a poor career choice and hasn't found a job that takes advantage of their strengths. They should move on and try something different.

There will always be a labor force, People who were unfortunate to do well in school for whatever reason and there will always be a ladder to clime, even if it takes a few side steps along the way.
Except there's less room at the top of the ladder than at the bottom, so more people are always going to be at the bottom, no matter how hard they work: and even your best case scenario there requires people to survive for years at the bottom of the ladder.
That's not going to work without the welfare state you want to shrink.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: The dumbest political gender argument I have seen yet
« Reply #149 on: November 07, 2016, 03:51:59 PM »
Jane.......So lets say there are two Janes (which to state I am proud of what you have been doing, sounds like you are on the right track and I wish you the absolute best with your forward progress)..but two Janes. Exactly the same story up until the point of the inheritance.

The YOU Jane....you have been attempting to intelligently use the money gifted to you in a positive and productive manner. Working hard getting your degree, taking advantage of the fact you don't have to work while in school leaving you the luxury of focusing full time on your schooling. Despite our debate here, it sounds as if you want to do on your own, which is great.

Then we have Jane number two....she got her inheritance, and said YIPPIE!!! She went and got a nice car, house, and partied life away and did nothing productive. Of course, after a while, math took its toll and she had no money...while Jane number one by this time had got her beginning position in her field of expertise. Should the hard working Jane number one support the lazy careless Jane number two???

Or how about you and I....I have stated the crap I had to deal with to go through school. I had no inheritance or anything of the sort....I showered in a freaking sink for crying out loud lol...should I come to you and say "Jane...give me money now, because it isn't fair you have money for school and I don't"....when denied I yell and say you don't care blah blah blah.

Also, do you think I don't care about people suffering??? Come on now...I would love to live in a world where there are unicorns and magic. However it isn't true.....that doesn't make me mad at those who have (such as yourself being able to focus on school in a real living place, able to eat and have clothing without having to choose which every day.)...I am happy your mother planned ahead enough to be able to afford you those luxuries. That is the goal of every good parent, to save their children some steps and heart ache.  It also does not entitle me to her or your spoils.

I want the best for everyone which is why I propose the system I propose. How to level out inflation and cost of living, proportioning it once more with wages....then you naturally level the field and give everyone a shot. Not force it on a unsustainable system....

Yes Jane I have already said there is some luck involved in everything "some" not all, not the majority, but there is always some. You need to make sure you have worked towards gathering the knowledge and skills to be able to capitalize on such blessings when they come. I have already given an example of this...

The same taxes for everyone would destroy the welfare state. It's inherently unfair, immoral and against the spirit on which your country was founded. Poor people would irremediably struggle to stay alive after the taxes have left them with less money than they need to buy food. Rich people would lose less money on taxes, meaning the government doesn't have the funding to maintain the highroads network, nor the police, or the firefighters, not to talk about public education, public healthcare, etc. As the government can't sustain the welfare state, private companies will take over those services. But they're companies, so they charge for it. The poor, already struggling to stay alive, would be alienated as they would obviously be unable to pay for those services. The rich would get richer, not only because they barely pay taxes, but because their companies are in control of those basic services everyone has to pay for in order to be integrated in this new society.

And now you have, once again, a country dominated by an aristocracy while most citizens barely survive. Talk about going back in time.

As I have stated in multiple points of this thread...you level the playing field naturally, this won't be an issue. 1/4 of a population paying taxes, and 3/4 of people either not paying, or even living off those taxes is unsustainable, especially with a nanny state. The obvious 20 trillion dollar debt explains this.

And let's not forget that no amount of "Word hard," is going to get them out of that situation because the jobs that require less skill are just as vital to the country as the geniuses planning innovations and trades etc. The people who must exist, who must fill those jobs, and as a result must end up paid less, can't just 'reap what they sow' because the economy is a bit more complicated than a motivational poster. They're limited by the job they have, and they can't just get a new one because someone needs to fill that job.
This is pretty darn close to the kink in all the "hard work, start your own business" mentality.  There always HAS to be people to do the menial tasks, like cashiers, food service, janitors, etc. On top of this, every employer needs to have an available pool of potential employees to fill whatever role is needed, be it skilled or unskilled.

As bad as this sounds, we need unskilled people to fill the roles that those of us who trained in a skill or got a degree don't want to do anymore.  In order to keep people working these jobs, they need to be able to afford to live working them, which isn't possible given the minimum wage in the US.

If every single wage earner followed your advice to find a way to get a better station in life, they would get useless training because their would be such ridiculous competition for those spots that they would be stuck right back where they were with nothing to show of their training.  We would have a slew of fast food cooks that are qualified to do your taxes, hook up electricity in your house, build skyscrapers, but no where to apply those skills.

The moral of the story is, not everyone can make it up the ladder, so those of us who climb have an obligation to make sure those that don't are taken care of for their sacrifice that allowed us to climb.

If you read through the conversations you will see I have the correction for this...Jane just keeps omitting it. If you level the playing field naturally as I have said, and like it once was, you won't have this issue.

This isn't "new" rhetoric that is untested...we (America) have already done it once and it was shown to be a success...it was our highlight.

You level inflation, wages, and cost of living...this is not a problem. Even the basic jobs will pay enough to afford you a livable lifestyle. Sure you won't be in a mansion, but you will be able to support yourself without a nanny state supporting you. Not to mention, as you work this basic job, you gain experience in that company and work your way up. Then the beginners will take your place, and the cycle of life starts over again.

Also, the American dream doesn't just have to be "starting your own business", it can be anything. The whole point in America is that it mirrored what you put it. If you came here and worked hard you were awarded a great life. That can be with a company you work for(you remember, the time you could work somewhere, bust your ass and actually retire) or a business you started. Doesn't mean you were a millionaire, but you had a nice comfortable house, car, and food...you had piece of mind.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir