Politics

[drew]

The latest "interaction" I've had on FB is with dipshits that think the president sets the gas prices.

I asked them, then, why last year in the middle of a global pandemic, prices went down? Of course, it has nothing to do with people being sent home to work, travel industry decimated, and nobody to buy gas. Supply up, demand down = lower prices. Now that we're "getting better" with C19, people are going back to offices, traveling, etc. Demand is up, so, FUCKING BIDEN!

Jesus people are fucking stupid.

I think the best shirt I've seen was "You can't fix stupid. But wearing a red hat makes it easier to identify it"

[dodint]

Like sort of a fictive nuance in fictive appalachian weed society.

Justified fan?

[Tom Servo]

I think the best shirt I've seen was "You can't fix stupid. But wearing a red hat makes it easier to identify it"

One of the best parts of the previous season of Curb Your Enthusiasm was Larry figuring out that if he wore a MAGA cap to crowded West LA restaurants, nobody would sit next to him and he wouldn't be all crowded in.

[Rare White Ape]

If you’ve done nothing wrong you’ve got nothing to hide.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-19/trump-january-6-congress-bannon-committee-biden/100547050

[Yw-slayer]

Incredible achievement by Billi's favourite world-leading government

[mk]

Justified fan?

Can't deny.
One refreshing thing was shooting and actually hitting.

IRL I'm still digesting the depth of this cold civil war concept.
Like capitol hill police vs. BLM protest vs. the other side.
Now it seems that you're actually living in deeply racist and fundamentally divided country.

Must hope that Trump can keep the base home and those others guide their moderate reds supporting blue, for the nation.

OT,
an incident here few weeks ago.
A nut case dug out a gun and shot a cop once, to the forehear and from a distance of 1m.
Panicing cops shot back 6 hitting 2.
Nothing was fatal.

[dodint]

Can't deny.
Now it seems that you're actually living in deeply racist and fundamentally divided country.

Is it that obvious? :lol:

One thing that people lose sight of is the newsmaking events are outliers. There is certainly a systemic race issue in the US; no denying that at all. But the common image of everyone wandering the streets looking for a fight just isn't true. There are fringe actors on both sides that the news people love to follow around, but the middle 80% of Americans are pretty laid back centrists (or just apathetic).

Not making excuses, or saying there isn't work to do. But not every American walks around like an extra in The Wire.

[Tom Servo]

That's true and really easy to lose sight of. Even when we've been travelling to some of the more red-state areas, the infowarrior rides festooned with Trump and Gadsden flags are pretty rare, just more common than you'd see out in my neck of the woods.

[Yw-slayer]

Wait, wait, wait. So you're saying that THE MEDIA EXAGGERATES AND BLOWS THINGS OUT OF PROPORTION??!?!??? HOW COULD THIS BE!??? +!?!? ISN'T EVERY JORUNALIST AN UPSTANDING MEMBER OF THE FOURTH ESTATE AND FREE PRESS SEEKING THE TRUUT WITHOUT FEAR OR FAVOUR!??! +???!?

[Crazed_Insanity]

My new neighborhood is liberal leaning, but also with significant # of conservatives... I think perhaps in such neck and neck purple places, you might end up seeing more crazies? Now that Trump is gone, I've seen 2 trucks carrying flags... one of them says 'fuck Biden' and another one said 'Impeach Biden'. It's interesting some folks would actually go thru the trouble to buy or make such flags and then put that on your trucks and parade around the neighborhood?

Still, that's only 2 trucks out of thousands of vehicles I see on the road so far. :p

I guess similar to airplane crashes, now they don't happen often, but when they do happen, they'd inevitably cause some reactions... if media were to talk about and show plane crashes or car crashes everyday, more and more people will probably decide to just stay home...

[dodint]

Wait, wait, wait. So you're saying that THE MEDIA EXAGGERATES AND BLOWS THINGS OUT OF PROPORTION??!?!??? HOW COULD THIS BE!??? +!?!? ISN'T EVERY JORUNALIST AN UPSTANDING MEMBER OF THE FOURTH ESTATE AND FREE PRESS SEEKING THE TRUUT WITHOUT FEAR OR FAVOUR!??! +???!?

They never did this before social media.

Millenials Ruined Journalism.

;)

[neanderthal]

One of the best parts of the previous season of Curb Your Enthusiasm was Larry figuring out that if he wore a MAGA cap to crowded West LA restaurants, nobody would sit next to him and he wouldn't be all crowded in.

One of the easiest ways to tell who's an idiot* if the truth be told. Wear that Trump gear proudly. We wanna know who you are!!!!

*by idiot i mean racist, xenophobe, homophobe, Islamophobe, everyotherkindofphobe, etc.

[neanderthal]

So, Tucker trying to make light/ fun of Buttiegieg(sp) taking paternity leave.

Everything that is wrong with the conservative viewpoint rolled into on clip.

[Tom Servo]

Seemed to be a coordinated thing with Matt Walsh, who ran a thing about how dads are essentially useless for the first few years of a child's life. Madison Cawthorn is out there telling people that they're raising emasculated men and that they should be raising "monsters."

Gotta love it.

[Rare White Ape]

Ahh yes, the party of politicians who pander to basic chuds that railed against that Gillette ad.

[Yw-slayer]

They never did this before social media.

Millenials Ruined Journalism.

;)

NO WAY

[FaultyMario]

Seemed to be a coordinated thing with Matt Walsh, who ran a thing about how dads are essentially useless for the first few years of a child's life. Madison Cawthorn is out there telling people that they're raising emasculated men and that they should be raising "monsters."

Gotta love it.

There was also a clip of the WH press official telling some reporter that paternity leave should be something to aspire to and that she wasn't going to go there. Politely telling her fuck off, in essence.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Seemed to be a coordinated thing with Matt Walsh, who ran a thing about how dads are essentially useless for the first few years of a child's life. Madison Cawthorn is out there telling people that they're raising emasculated men and that they should be raising "monsters."

Gotta love it.

Thanks to Jordan Peterson, at least I understand what they mean by ‘monster’.

You could be hurt by another monster and become another monster that way out of spite… or you could be raised or trained to be a ‘monster’ voluntarily, not to hurt others, but to prevent other monsters from hurting you and the ones you love.

Like shaolin monks were raised to kick ass, but they don’t just kick peoples ass for no reason. Mostly just for self defense. In the west, I suppose William Wallace is a type of ‘monster’.

I’d certainly raise my daughter to submit to her husband or boss voluntarily, but once they become assholes to walk all over her, she also need some monster skills to kick some ass… or just run off fast! :p

[Tom Servo]

Former dear leader has announced his social media platform, "TRUTH social". Says it'll be starting invite-only next month. Appears to only work on iOS.

It's in cooperation with SPAC called Digital World Acquisition Corp. The guy listed as the CEO of that, Patrick Francis Orlando, has a gmail address as his contact, his physical address listed in Wuhan, China, and apparently made an $11 million dollar insider trade buy (https://twitter.com/fintel_io/status/1436449302059098114) last month in his own company. The company's physical address is a WeWork coworking space and, according to the SEC, the company has never made any other deal/funded any other startup.

The 23rd rule in the terms and conditions for the "ultimate free speech site" is that you are not allowed to make fun of the ultimate free speech site. The physical contact address for TRUTH is Mar-A-Lago's street address.

Another rule bans excessive caps (https://twitter.com/aaronjschaffer/status/1451013156319469572), so I figure Donald himself will get the banhammer pretty much immediately.

This is going to go extremely well, I can just feel it.

[Tom Servo]

Hahahahah, fuck me, it's already going great. https://twitter.com/stevanzetti/status/1451030745263263745

[Rare White Ape]

So the PATRIOTS who laughed at "LiBeRaLs" for needing a safe space have... created their own safe space, huh?

L O L

[Tom Servo]

It's also like their fourth safe space just in this genre. They already have Gab, Parler, and Gettr.

[Rare White Ape]

And also despite having the RWNJ media at their disposal they claim they're being silenced, so need a platform to rally themselves around too?

Trump could just start a blog instead, but they all probably need that hype train of strong social media to rile up dumbass voters.

I mean, not trying to give anyone ideas here, but Trump could jump on Fox News for a nightly bit and have the rest of America frothing. Absolutely frothing.

[Tom Servo]

Trump could just start a blog instead, but they all probably need that hype train of strong social media to rile up dumbass voters.

He actually tried that (https://wapo.st/3E6ZLLb), and it failed spectacularly.

[Leon]

Is the orange man not dead yet? Wow.

[neanderthal]

I found another tweet (https://twitter.com/BlueSteelDC/status/1451168638195703816?t=qyfhi0A2qXqzSKYOEkVlPQ&s=19) that perfectly describes billi and em.


Democrats: Imperfect , offers you 5 dollars and gets you 3.

Youth Voter Reaction: We hate them run them out of town. Why Vote?!!

Republicans:Give them nothing, if they complain- take something.

Youth voters: Who? I don’t know them but let them take over-Dems need to learn

[Crazed_Insanity]

Who's 'em? You think I'm very young? Thanks man! :p

Let me differentiate my self a bit..., I'd gladly vote for the dems who might really give me the $3. I just didn't think Hillary would be able to give me the $3 I really want, thus my indifference for her. (Not to mention I've always feel like Bernie Sanders is a $4 candidate, but DNC seems to want to stick with pretending to give $3 for whatever reasons... and if they couldn't keep their promise, we can always just blame the GOP.)

My indifference wasn't intended to 'let them win', but to just let voters who cared enough to decide for themselves... I was really upset enough to vote Trump in as the anti-establishment candidate, but the pussy grabbing comment was really the last straw for me... so no votes for either one of them. I was okay to 'let' Hillary win, but I just wasn't going to vote for her. I didn't want to 'help' either one of them into the WH.

Both Trump races were close. He narrowly won the 1st time(without any political baggage), but just couldn't win the 2nd time even against Sleepy Joe. Shows how 'great' he really is after a single term. American people are dumb, but not so dumb that they couldn't see how the president is doing... Anti-establishment sentiments helped him, but the return the normalcy sentiments definitely did not. Trump is just not a normal president so he got booted out. I could vote 3rd party again and he'll still be booted out. Both Hillary and Joe do not need my vote. I hope someday you'll be able to see this reality. I need to move to a swing state to make more difference. I'm at WA now, which is still a pretty blue state, but at least I think I'm living in a 'swinging purple' city. So maybe I can make more of a difference here... :p

[Tom Servo]

90 Seconds of Rage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/10/16/us/capitol-riot.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE IPuonUyYiZ_tU1Gw5CRWySB4B991rf3b-WnvshnTj1JTCUVTFGiv4UBJTG-1vIYeArQeoP6AmhZY0LNq4zFrs1z-lDMlZkQBWpvJbDwswLKXpspN72D2hrgteQB-9ntDbmZTb8JbguzrDjtR_YPGHhS7WfhSN6XHttp5thdlGo23ca lOySQqMuhI4Ijbp2DYt6RDwDeCGIo_Lrbh10M92DZRvagRIkD6 AbAXqA2I7BtM9TNVlaGlnET3tg4W4j6d46ONIfPKj3LRNIa9Or jRUjp-F8ZQHzaKjpSRyH&smid=url-share), NY Times article covering the background and what lead seven people to their assault on the capitol police on January 6th.

I think I even shared it right this time, so people can actually read it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes, you shared it right! Thanks for sharing again! Very long, but a good read.

[FaultyMario]

90 Seconds of Rage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/10/16/us/capitol-riot.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE IPuonUyYiZ_tU1Gw5CRWySB4B991rf3b-WnvshnTj1JTCUVTFGiv4UBJTG-1vIYeArQeoP6AmhZY0LNq4zFrs1z-lDMlZkQBWpvJbDwswLKXpspN72D2hrgteQB-9ntDbmZTb8JbguzrDjtR_YPGHhS7WfhSN6XHttp5thdlGo23ca lOySQqMuhI4Ijbp2DYt6RDwDeCGIo_Lrbh10M92DZRvagRIkD6 AbAXqA2I7BtM9TNVlaGlnET3tg4W4j6d46ONIfPKj3LRNIa9Or jRUjp-F8ZQHzaKjpSRyH&smid=url-share), NY Times article covering the background and what lead seven people to their assault on the capitol police on January 6th.

I think I even shared it right this time, so people can actually read it.

No way this guy looks nazi-ish.

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2021/08/23/barry-riots/assets/images/head_04-300.jpg

[neanderthal]

As for me, i'm tired of profiles of Trump supporters, but maybe it's just me. Fuck em.

Time for some lengthy jail terms and profiles on all other voters and especially the candidates.

[mk]

"and create a pathway for losing candidates, party officials, election judges and certain interest groups to request audits and challenge the results of future elections."
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/Study-predicts-hefty-costs-for-Texas-election-16530414.php

One must wonder what kind of people some of those Texas "law" men are.
No doubt thoug, changing a winner would create some juicy headlines.

[Dicknose]

Interesting.
Its easy to get caught up in "mob mentality", when law and order disappear and you feel free to do anything. Emotions get wound up as the crowd goes into a frenzy. Its a feedback loop that can make people act outside what they would normally do.
Not saying that's a justification or that people shouldn't be held responsible.

[Yw-slayer]

Quite, but of course if it's Pro-Billi stuff then the western MSM will laud the mob as "FREEDOM FIGHTERS" and happily ignore and/or excuse all the stupid and violent shit that's done "BECAUSE FREEDOM".

[Crazed_Insanity]

You sound quite like a media machine… also, nobody is pro-billi. Not even roofer would agree with my ideology!

Herd mentality can be scary, not trying to excuse or justify anything, but if the right is anything like the media’s portrayed, there really should be a LOT more carnage during Jan6.

[Yw-slayer]

Ah, right wing Americans are calling for an invasion of Australia. Incredible achievement by Billi!!

[Dicknose]

Yeah cause FREEDOM!

Most dont realise that we are (and have been for a long while) a much more socialist society. Individual freedoms aren't the top priority.
We were one of the first places with mandatory seatbelts, we had random alcohol testing of drivers since the 80s. Heck you have a group of us waiting to be served and we will self organise a line or make sure that someone waiting before us is served next.
An aussie friend who lives in the USA had one of their adult kids come here for a year. They were surprised by catching a bus that people just form a line. They came from San Fran and we used to buses, but not that level of self organisation and the importance of going in turn.
Yeah we are a bunch of sheep, but it does make for a nice society in some ways. Much less of the dog eat dog style.

So please dont invade, we are doing ok. Plus we dont have guns!

[Crazed_Insanity]

It is fascinating people on the left are afraid of the dictator wannabe Trump and people on the right are afraid of Biden the dictator trying to mandate vaccines onto them.

Depending on which side you’re on, you’d be okay with a ‘dictator’ ignoring the wish of the people as long as he shares the same ideology as yourself.

No point talking about trump, but we might justify Biden because he’s doing the right thing with this mandate. So fuck those peoples wishes. Similarly, chairman Xi is making China great again, so it’s okay to erase celebrities or rich people if they get out of line…

True leaders will have willing followers and won’t require any mandates.

Anyway, Americans really need to save ourselves 1st before contemplating on saving Aussies.

Regarding sheepishly forming lines in orderly fashion without being told, not sure if socialism or freedom has anything to do with that. I’m pretty sure most Chinese people won’t form any lines. They are supposedly socialists and with minimal freedoms. Americans on the opposite spectrum are beginning to behave similarly…

I think that depends mostly on population density. When it’s crowded and resources become tight, everyone will be for himself only. Toilet paper incident happened all over the world. As Aussie population increases, pretty sure automatic line forming will decrease.

[Dicknose]

As Aussie population increases, pretty sure automatic line forming will decrease.

You do realise we are one of the most densely populated places??? Well when you consider where people live.
We have vast areas, but then most of us live in a few large cities. So we have vast areas of nothing and a few areas of massive population.
Yes we had runs on things - but the supermarkets put in limits. There was outrage if people tried to exceed the limits.

Its not a population thing... its a cultural thing. Its strongly ingrained in us from a young age that you go when its your turn and that skipping or cutting in on a line is bad.

And china might be socialist govt, doesn't mean the people act in a socialist style. Thats enforced on them, so I could easily see when its not that they act the opposite.
We have a democracy and as a group usually lean towards a more social end. This shows in things from this unenforced lining to stuff like free medical care. Its both the people and the govt (acting in a way to get voted in) that act in this style. We are typically happy to give up individual freedoms for the greater good. And it has nothing to do with - "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". We give up some individual freedoms for a better society.

I dont think a socialist dictator is good comparison.

[Yw-slayer]

Billi (like Ted Cruz and other right-wing wankers) making sweeping and inaccurate generalisations about a place, or about something, as though they are gospel? Say it ain't so!!!

[Crazed_Insanity]

I dont think a socialist dictator is good comparison.

I just don't believe politics has anything to do with automatic line forming. Is Sidney really as dense as SF or NY? If we only have Aussies living in the US, will they really be lining up at NY subways? I kinda doubt that. Plus, these dense cities are usually not the type that love 'freedom' nor Trump.

Another example would be people automatically turning a broken traffic light into a 4 way stop sign at intersections... I don't believe drivers in either Taiwan or China will be able to do that. However, I'm pretty confident drivers in Australia and US should have no problems doing that.

So I do believe population density is probably the main driver, but I can agree cultural inheritance/influence could have something to do with that too. China was war torn and occupied for a long time... and add cultural revolution, one child policy and dense population in the mix... it's understandable that the population end up becoming more selfish and distrustful of others. No amount of socialism will be able to transform people to all of a sudden to want to sacrifice self for the gain of the whole. It will take some time for China to get there.

I guess another reason why I hate the CCP is because they've done great damage to Chinese culture.

[Dicknose]

I just don't believe politics has anything to do with automatic line forming.

I think its actually a great indicator of political style!!

It sums up some of the big cultural differences between the USA and Australia, which show up in politics.

And its the line forming that influences the politics, not the other way around.



Is Sidney really as dense as SF or NY? If we only have Aussies living in the US, will they really be lining up at NY subways? I kinda doubt that. Plus, these dense cities are usually not the type that love 'freedom' nor Trump.

Sydney's population is about 5 million. So nothing like NY, but still up there with most big US cities. Melbourne is similar.
We lack the "small towns" that make up such a large part of the US. Its not that we dont have them, just that there are very few and only a tiny percentage of people live in them.
Quick google (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_Australia) and it shows that we are highly urbanised. Most living in major cities - damn near half living in just 2 cities. We are more urbanised than the US.



So I do believe population density is probably the main driver, but I can agree cultural inheritance/influence could have something to do with that too.
And I think Australia blows that theory away. Our population density (urbanisation) is high and has been for a long while. Higher than the USA.
Yet our styles are quite different. Politically our right is in some ways left of your left. Bernie Sanders would be considered centralist.
We have socialised medicine, universal unemployment benefits, compulsory employed paid retirement funds (currently 10% of income). We also have restrictions on "freedoms" such as compulsory bicycle helmets, seat belt laws since the 70s, random alcohol testing of drivers, strict weapon laws (I can't own a slingshot!). During this pandemic we have strict rules, masks, curfews, lockdowns and now vaccine mandates. I can't travel to Sydney. You can't enter most shops unless you are fully vaccinated.
This can seem quite totalitarian but it is not a dictatorship enacting these rules, its actually a democratic govt and does seem to reflect the style and will of the people.

The US is much more focused on the individual and is more "dog eat dog". The US prides itself that people can "make it" and often hold the reverse, if you dont make it, its because you didn't try hard enough. Unemployed - that's your own fault and we shouldn't help you. Someone got ahead of you getting their bagel - bad luck, be more assertive.
Some other countries have a bigger focus on family (which sometimes can make them less socialist, in that its just assumed that your family will be your support).

These cultural difference do show up as political differences.
And I do think the "several aussies will just form a line" is the perfect example of this.

[Rare White Ape]

There’s a line each morning at the bus stop near where I stay in Brisbane. It’s for the #60 CityGlider which runs every 5 mins at peak hour. It’s not unusual to have 30 people queueing up for each bus over that period of the morning, all of us spaced 1.5 meters apart and wearing masks.

(It should be noted that our last lockdown was two months ago and we have ZERO cases of Delta COVID free in the community)

And get this Billi, this will blow your mind: the queue is off to one side of the footpath so that pedestrians can walk by, AND, there’s a gap to accommodate the entrance of an apartment building!!!!!!!! And nobody pushes in!!!!!!!!!

What’s more, when you get off the bus people always wait for passengers to hop off before getting on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Socialism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyway, just to be clear that I'm not against socialism, but I'm just not buying that's the reason for automatic line forming. When I was younger, I think automatic line forming was happening more, but it just feel like as population grew, americans began to ignore this unspoken social contract...

For asian nations, I think Japanese are probably most likely to form lines automatically and allow cars to merge in front of them in a traffic jam..., yet, I'm not sure if they're really that socialistic? However Japanese were conditioned to work together for the glory of the empire like Klingons... So cultural reason is probably why they do it? Japan has a very dense population too? So my theory is that when it becomes crowded enough, that will most likely destroy the cultural influence? Japan cities may be dense, but they probably don't have a lot of immigrants or new born babies, right? If numbers were to really grow exponentially, I'm willing to bet their cultural norm will be impacted.

Anyway, the fact that Australia has more dense cities is probably the main reason why you guys got way more liberal than US. Our dense cities are pretty liberal too, but we also have vast farm areas where more conservatives live. Conservatives do not out number the big city liberals, but unfortunately our constitution was designed to give them a bit more advantage...

[neanderthal]

Billi (like Ted Cruz and other right-wing wankers) making sweeping and inaccurate generalisations about a place, or about something, as though they are gospel? Say it ain't so!!!

And he's always. fucking. wrong. Or remarkably lacking in context. Or not considering R E A L I T Y. Or some other realy dumb shit. It's a pattern of being wrong, coupled with a remarkable lack of introspection which makes for the fuck stick levels of buffonery he constantly posts while thinking he's being clever.

[neanderthal]

Y'all see the headline that a woman was raped on a train in Philly, and no one did any thing, although some people did get their phones out to record. Then it turns out it was a lie by the police...

[Tom Servo]

Y'all see the headline that a woman was raped on a train in Philly, and no one did any thing, although some people did get their phones out to record. Then it turns out it was a lie by the police...

I just went to Philly over the weekend, and my wife mentioned that while we were on our way out there. I'd heard nothing about it, nor that it was potentially false, got any links I can read?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don’t think cop really knew there weren’t that many passengers on that train and told half truths?

What motivation do police have to lie about this?

Security camera showed us the truth. Not very many folks saw and know what was going on except 1 or 2 folks and 1 of them did call 911? Police was probably assuming a lot of things when they talked to the media.

Personally I’d still trust police reports but of course we need to verify and not take it as gospel.

Surely not all blue lives are corrupt liars just as not all black lives are thugs.

[neanderthal]

I just went to Philly over the weekend, and my wife mentioned that while we were on our way out there. I'd heard nothing about it, nor that it was potentially false, got any links I can read?

Quick google for "woman raped on train Philly." (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=woman+raped+on+train+in+philly)

Amended search to include "police lied" (https://www.google.com/search?q=woman+raped+on+train+in+philly.+police+li ed&client=firefox-b-1-d&sxsrf=AOaemvKrWkpsd1Vx9mqsXvASNHaDT7kRsw%3A1635256 059609&ei=-wZ4YdLeJJinqtsP2fKDIA&ved=0ahUKEwiSyLLEm-jzAhWYk2oFHVn5AAQQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=woman+raped+on+train+in+philly.+police+lied&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsANKBAhBGABQ9-sEWJWEBWDbiAVoAXACeACAAewBiAHJEJIBBTMuNS41mAEAoAEB yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz) at the end.

[George]

While I'm not glad the police lied, if they did (I haven't read the details), that's better than people not assisting the victim in this situation.

And by "assisting", of course I mean causing immediate and grievous bodily harm to the attacker once his intentions were clear.

[Dicknose]

There’s a line each morning at the bus stop near where I stay in Brisbane.

Was thinking about this a bit more - I caught a bus to school for primary school (years 1-6) and we made a line at our local stop. Generally put your bag in a position then went and did whatever you did to kill time. Bus comes, everyone yells and then resumes position in the line.
No one told us to do this, it was just something you learned from the older kids.
It does seem to permeate our culture.

Now we aren't so polite when driving...

And Billi - from what Ive seen of Japan Id agree that they also have a similar culture, very orderly. More so than aussies.
They are also way more formal, were we are orderly but amazingly informal.

A quick google and a list of successful "social democracies", included Japan..

"Other countries that have adopted and enacted socialist ideas and policies to various degrees, and have seen success in improving their societies by doing so, are Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand."

[Tom Servo]

On the same day I saw Elon Musk very upset that the government is talking about taxing him an extra $10 billion a year, I also saw an article that he "earned" $36 billion in one day.

Puts it into perspective a bit. $10 billion sounds like a lot to us plebes, but I'd happily pay less than 1/3 of a day's pay for my yearly taxes.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I’m never happy to pay my taxes and surely I’ll be upset too if I suddenly find myself owing more to Uncle Sam this year than last year…

I won’t feel sorry for Elon, but just saying I can understand being upset.

Of course I can be happy giving to worthy causes. Giving to US government is just kinda iffy… social programs sure, but using my tax dollars to bomb another country… not so sure.

[Tom Servo]

Huh, I'm always happy to pay my taxes. I'm not always thrilled with how they're used, but to me it's up there with voting. It's doing my part to contribute to our society.

I guess it means something that our accountant is always annoyed at us for being "too honest."

[Crazed_Insanity]

You are indeed making your accountants job harder! I can totally understand why he might be annoyed by you! :p

[Crazed_Insanity]

Was thinking about this a bit more - I caught a bus to school for primary school (years 1-6) and we made a line at our local stop. Generally put your bag in a position then went and did whatever you did to kill time. Bus comes, everyone yells and then resumes position in the line.
No one told us to do this, it was just something you learned from the older kids.
It does seem to permeate our culture.

Now we aren't so polite when driving...

And Billi - from what Ive seen of Japan Id agree that they also have a similar culture, very orderly. More so than aussies.
They are also way more formal, were we are orderly but amazingly informal.

A quick google and a list of successful "social democracies", included Japan..

"Other countries that have adopted and enacted socialist ideas and policies to various degrees, and have seen success in improving their societies by doing so, are Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand."

Anyway DN, I think the only conclusion we can agree on is that big dense cities tend to be more liberal and rural farmlands tend to be more conservative. However, I’m just not sure I’d buy the conclusion that in farm areas, American kids would get all disorderly when boarding school buses… but in big liberal cities, kids would form lines because they’re more into socialistic ideas…

Culture can definitely be a bigger factor(traditional Japan had an emperor so they we’re definitely not socialistic), and of all those socialistic nations you listed, how many have high birth rates and high immigration rates? Most of those nations are begging people to have more kids because of dwindling population, right?

[Rare White Ape]

People vote for politicians -> politicians mis-spend our taxes -> people distrust government -> politicians promise to end corruption and reduce taxes -> people vote for politicians -> politicians mis-spend our taxes -> and so-on…

I’m happy to pay taxes as well. As a collective we’ve got to decouple political mismanagement from that equation.

The real problem is tax cuts for the rich (like everyone’s hero Elon (luv heart luv heart teary puppy dog eyes)) that disproportionately affect poor people.

[Crazed_Insanity]

The problem today is that our elections are rigged so that we the people can only vote for politicians who are friendly to the rich, doesn’t matter which party!

I’d gladly see more billionaires building companies like SpaceX and Tesla who actually build things to improve our lives over companies like hedge funds.

Tax rates should just be flat and steady and fair for all. However, I guess I can dream on…

[Rare White Ape]

Your life is all unicorns and rainbows so it doesn't matter.

[JoshInKC]

Tax rates should just be flat and steady and fair for all. However, I guess I can dream on…
Yes, you're definitely dreaming if the concept of "flat" and "fair" can apply to the same taxes at the same time.

[Rare White Ape]

There's not just income tax, either. Things like capital gains tax, where you pay tax on selling assets if you made a profit. CGT actually prevents some people from selling properties because they believe the tax rate is too high and they'd lose a lot of money selling their investment house, so they're better off keeping it and renting it out.

Currently there is concern that young people are locked out of home ownership despite earning above minimum wage in two-income families because property prices have been driven up by investors using them as a way to earn money. If you wanted prices to drop and personal home ownership to increase, would you cut a tax in a way that generally benefits rich people who own more than one property?

Huge grey area. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the way that the real estate landscape has been fettled with over the last 20 years in Australia, generally to the detriment of young people in 2021. Banks own lots of property through servicing of home loans, and would be worth a large proportion of their net value. Fiddle with the economy to drop real estate prices by 20% and you cause banks to suffer. Banks won't like this and the cogs of industry would turn and cause that government to fail. And so-on and so-forth.

But yeah it'd be nice for taxes to steady and fair for all.

[Tom Servo]

Yes, you're definitely dreaming if the concept of "flat" and "fair" can apply to the same taxes at the same time.

I have never seen that put more succinctly.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes, you're definitely dreaming if the concept of "flat" and "fair" can apply to the same taxes at the same time.

Flat is definitely fair. There's no reason to believe over taxing the rich is fairer just as under taxing them. Just because rich has more money, doesn't justify any of us to take more from them. The rich ought to be able to give away or invest out of their own accord. Government won't know how to properly distribute and use that money anyways...

Sales tax is pretty flat for everyone... and that's probably the fairest form of tax. If we do want to help out the poor a bit, then we can definitely not tax basic, essential products like food and perhaps raise the sales tax % a bit for luxury items, especially imported luxury items. Not sure how to get rich people's money from offshore, but if they ever spend it and bring it home, we gotta make sure we're able to tax it somehow. ;)

The thing about people like Elon is that he's only rich on paper. He doesn't have much actual 'income' because he's paid lower than min wage. That's why I think we should focus more on sales and property tax. Go hide all your money offshore or in bitcoin all you want, but as soon as you use it on US territory, you'll have to pay your fair share. To me, same percentage for everyone is fairest. If you're still living below poverty level, then government really should be responsible for helping such person to get to the living wage level(either raise min wage or hand out UBI). If a person chooses to live like Jesus and not want to hold a real job and stay at poverty level, then that's his problem. Jesus has no issues with paying fair share of taxes. Speaking of that... Churches can also be taxed too... whenever they buy stuffs outside of God's Kingdom within US territory and if they own the church building, they pay property tax!

Income tax based system simply puts most pressures on the middle class.

[FaultyMario]

No. Rawls was right, you are wrong.

[Crazed_Insanity]

There's not just income tax, either. Things like capital gains tax, where you pay tax on selling assets if you made a profit. CGT actually prevents some people from selling properties because they believe the tax rate is too high and they'd lose a lot of money selling their investment house, so they're better off keeping it and renting it out.

Currently there is concern that young people are locked out of home ownership despite earning above minimum wage in two-income families because property prices have been driven up by investors using them as a way to earn money. If you wanted prices to drop and personal home ownership to increase, would you cut a tax in a way that generally benefits rich people who own more than one property?

Huge grey area. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the way that the real estate landscape has been fettled with over the last 20 years in Australia, generally to the detriment of young people in 2021. Banks own lots of property through servicing of home loans, and would be worth a large proportion of their net value. Fiddle with the economy to drop real estate prices by 20% and you cause banks to suffer. Banks won't like this and the cogs of industry would turn and cause that government to fail. And so-on and so-forth.


When you have super low rates, it'll simply fuel the real estate market. In the US, home loan interest payments are also tax deductible too. There's almost no reason for you to not buy a home... I think US tax codes were to encourage home ownership, but today, it's now leaning favoring to homeowners... thus allowing them to get richer, while the renters get poorer... Most home owners are probably on the 'rich' side even though they are not quite Elon level rich, but still, a home loan pretty much has a fixed monthly payment for 15, 30 years... only property tax might rise a bit and then perhaps some repair costs down the road, where as a rent will sure to be ever increasing over the next 15 and 30 years way faster than ownership cost because surely the owners will pass the cost down to the renters... and after 30 years, renters have nothing, but the home owner have a house that'll worth a LOT more! So it's not just capital gains tax causing people to own homes and rent them out. You can have no capital gains tax and homeowners can still win financially longterm... (assuming no natural disasters that'd destroy your property...)

One way to solve this problem is to just build more homes for people because typically population increases... but houses/land are limited in supply. Unfortunately, current market conditions have shortage of labors and supplies... so it isn't that easy to meet demand. So we need more supplies in other ways...

The other solution is to make it harder to hold on to investment properties. It doesn't help if homes are being bought up by investors rather than actual homeowners who plan to actually live in the homes... of course whatever we do, we should do gradually and not cause all investors to dump their properties at once... There are no easy solutions...

At the moment, you should still buy a home if you can...

[Tom Servo]

Decent explainer on the fairness or lack thereof of a flat tax: https://mfranciswrites.medium.com/why-a-flat-tax-hurts-the-poor-b295341a89c1

[Yw-slayer]

Man, this shit is hilarious.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Decent explainer on the fairness or lack thereof of a flat tax: https://mfranciswrites.medium.com/why-a-flat-tax-hurts-the-poor-b295341a89c1

That article is talking flat as if everyone paying the same dollar amount. Am I understanding flat tax incorrectly?

I'm not talking flat dollar amount, I'm talking flat rate. Everyone pays a flat rate, not flat dollar amount. Of course if you drop the same paper money infront of a homeless person and a CEO, the two will perceive the value of that money differently. No shit. I'm not that stupid. :p But in a flat tax system, homeless person will pay no tax because he likely has no income and couldn't buy anything and owns nothing..., but CEO will pay the same rate just as anybody else.

Main opposition for a flat tax would probably be accounting lobbyists. If we have a flat tax rate code, they'd be out of a job... the entire accountant industry will likely be wiped out..., make flat tax system as impossible as getting rid of all our guns.

But I really don't understand why everyone paying the same tax rate is wrong. You guys are really weird. :p

If flat tax hurts the poor, then current system is really fucking the poor. So flat tax is still an improvement.

Anyway, that article isn't very convincing, to me at least. Maybe I'm just too stupid. I don't believe rich need to pay higher tax rates. They should know better what to do with their money than the government. This is the part of the 'socialism' that I'm not on board with... and what the conservatives are afraid of I think. The rich doesn't owe it to the poor to feed them. It's probably to their benefit to take care of the poor, but the rich don't owe them. If you work insanely hard and smart and you make more money, you deserve your money. If you managed your inheritance well enough, you deserve your money. Most poor people don't work as hard and smart as Elon and if you give them millions of dollars, they'll not only spend it all... they'll usually end up in deeper trouble. See lotto winners.

Do you have a better rational explanation why rich needs to pay higher tax rates? And exactly how much more to be really 'fair'? who gets to determine that? The politicians? :lol:

[MR2 Fan]

There's almost no reason for you to not buy a home...

Send me $300,000 and I'll buy a home...that's on the VERY low end of home prices here

[Tom Servo]

I get this feeling like you skimmed the article. It is most definitely talking about a flat tax rate, not a flat dollar amount. It points out that for different levels of income, everyone *is* taxed at the same rate for the same part of their earnings.

It also points out that a flat tax is better than the current system that allows the super rich to pay literally nothing in taxes, but that that's not an argument in favor of a flat tax over a progressive one, it's just an argument that our current tax system is broken.

There are *tons* of essays and articles explaining why progressive tax systems are better and fairer, and how a flat tax is a regressive tax that puts more burden on the poor. Instead of focusing on the homeless person with no earnings, try comparing someone bringing home $30K a year vs. $300K a year. The article is arguing that due to the law of diminishing marginal utility, the $5,100 a year in taxes that someone making $30,000 a year would pay hurts them more than the $51,000 in taxes that someone making $300K a year would (this is using a 17% tax rate, which is what Steve Forbes keeps throwing out there as his flat tax rate). That tax on the lower income earner hurts their ability to house and feed themselves, which it does not do to the higher income earner.

That said, if you truly believe in that level of individualism, that nobody in society owes it to anyone else to help the overall society, that wealth is truly an indicator of hard work and your value as a member of society, I can see why you'd think a flat tax is fair.

[dodint]

Send me $300,000 and I'll buy a home...that's on the VERY low end of home prices here

Nice downpayment, bro.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Send me $300,000 and I'll buy a home...that's on the VERY low end of home prices here

It’s just like finding your 1st job, getting thru that 1st door is the hardest thing to do. Right now is probably not a great time to buy I suppose. Key is to not get too discouraged and keep looking(so you can get a good feel of what the market conditions are like, what’s a good deal and what’s not…) and to keep on saving for a sizable down payment so that you can be ready when opportunities knock. If you can qualify for a zero down loan and if you can afford the payments, considering how low the rates are, just go for it.

[Dicknose]

traditional Japan had an emperor so they we’re definitely not socialistic
UK, NZ, Australia, Canada have a monarch, but are often considered to be socialist.
Denmark and Sweden are kingdoms! Netherlands as well.

I dont think in a modern democratic society, having a monarch stops you from being at the socialist end of the scale.
Actually would seem that most actually have a monarchy.

Not sure what the big about population growth means?
Are you implying that they can be more socialist because they dont have high population growth??
Australia has had decent population growth for a long time. Population has about doubled in my time.
We also have very high immigration, as does Canada.

Also note that many of these countries top the list for "most liveable"

[Dicknose]

Flat is definitely fair. There's no reason to believe over taxing the rich is fairer just as under taxing them. Just because rich has more money, doesn't justify any of us to take more from them. The rich ought to be able to give away or invest out of their own accord. Government won't know how to properly distribute and use that money anyways...

Sales tax is pretty flat for everyone... and that's probably the fairest form of tax. If we do want to help out the poor a bit, then we can definitely not tax basic, essential products like food and perhaps raise the sales tax % a bit for luxury items, especially imported luxury items. Not sure how to get rich people's money from offshore, but if they ever spend it and bring it home, we gotta make sure we're able to tax it somehow. ;)


And sale tax is not flat....
because the more money you have, the bigger percentage of your income gets spent on taxed items.

easy for some people to have most of their spending go on rent and basic food. They might end up with only 10% of their spending being taxed.
Someone who is wealthier could have 50% or more of their spending on taxed items.

Not flat - and that's a good thing.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I get this feeling like you skimmed the article. It is most definitely talking about a flat tax rate, not a flat dollar amount. It points out that for different levels of income, everyone *is* taxed at the same rate for the same part of their earnings.

It also points out that a flat tax is better than the current system that allows the super rich to pay literally nothing in taxes, but that that's not an argument in favor of a flat tax over a progressive one, it's just an argument that our current tax system is broken.

There are *tons* of essays and articles explaining why progressive tax systems are better and fairer, and how a flat tax is a regressive tax that puts more burden on the poor. Instead of focusing on the homeless person with no earnings, try comparing someone bringing home $30K a year vs. $300K a year. The article is arguing that due to the law of diminishing marginal utility, the $5,100 a year in taxes that someone making $30,000 a year would pay hurts them more than the $51,000 in taxes that someone making $300K a year would (this is using a 17% tax rate, which is what Steve Forbes keeps throwing out there as his flat tax rate). That tax on the lower income earner hurts their ability to house and feed themselves, which it does not do to the higher income earner.

That said, if you truly believe in that level of individualism, that nobody in society owes it to anyone else to help the overall society, that wealth is truly an indicator of hard work and your value as a member of society, I can see why you'd think a flat tax is fair.

Wealth is definitely not a true indicator of hardwork. There can definitely be shady rich people. Stupid rich people will likely quickly boost the economy and squander all their wealth. However, for somebody/family who managed to stayed consistently rich, that'll take some level of work. To actually grow their wealth, that'll definitely take even more work and possibly luck.

Whereas take a look at our government. They have been consistently be given money... and see how much they owe now? Our government is simply not a very good manager of our nation's wealth. Rich people tend to have selfish reasons to invest and grow their money... and such growth can benefit our society as well. Rich definitely paid too little taxes now, but I do believe our government will simply waste their tax money even if we were to make them pay their fair share and more.

I can agree that people below poverty level probably should pay no taxes. Families making below average wages should definitely get some sort of breaks, but it shouldn't be incumbent upon the rich to pay extra to feed them. Money probably will be better spent to invest in whatever rich people want... and hopefully end up creating more jobs. BTW, difference with UBI is that it's not just for the poor, UBI is supposedly for 'everybody'. It's just extra wealth and we don't really know what to do with it... so we share it with everybody. That's fair IMHO.

If all of our politicians are like Bernie Sanders, I can definitely agree with you guys. I do trust in his integrity that he won't waste our tax money. However, I do believe Bernie Sanders will probably crash all kinds of markets... then perhaps we all can afford cheap homes and no longer need to rely on China to provide us with cheap products? ;)

There's probably a right balance somewhere... if we tax the rich too much, we'll all likely suffer. Capitalism isn't completely wrong and socialism isn't completely right. If we want our overall national wealth to grow, we should trust to rich people to get that done, not blindly trust our government. Of course US is doing that at the expense of, previously slaves, but now poorer people. That needs to change.

[Dicknose]

It also points out that a flat tax is better than the current system that allows the super rich to pay literally nothing in taxes, but that that's not an argument in favor of a flat tax over a progressive one, it's just an argument that our current tax system is broken.

That would apply if it was "flat rate - no deductions", but flat rate and deductions would be even worse.



That said, if you truly believe in that level of individualism, that nobody in society owes it to anyone else to help the overall society, that wealth is truly an indicator of hard work and your value as a member of society, I can see why you'd think a flat tax is fair.
Clearly doesn't line up for the bus!!!

US and Aus tax rates and brackets are very different.
Our main brackets are (in approx USD)
<14k 0%
<34k 19%
<90k 33%
<135k 37%
>135k 45%

The US has no "tax free threshold", its 10% at the lowest end, so you are paying more tax at 10k income than Australia.
But that quickly changes as incomes get bigger.
Get to
100k - Aus is 33%, US is 24%
200k - Aus is 45%, US is 32%

The numbers are worse when you look at how much that actually is, since these are marginal rates.
in USD the tax paid on income.
100k - Aus is 25k, US is 18k
200k - Aus is 68k, US is 45k
And the gap grows quickly from there.

Our effective tax rate is much higher and a lot less flat!

[Crazed_Insanity]

And sale tax is not flat....
because the more money you have, the bigger percentage of your income gets spent on taxed items.

easy for some people to have most of their spending go on rent and basic food. They might end up with only 10% of their spending being taxed.
Someone who is wealthier could have 50% or more of their spending on taxed items.

Not flat - and that's a good thing.

Everyone needs to buy something. The more you buy, the more you're taxed. The less you buy, the less you're taxed. Poor people will have less money to spend so they'll end up paying less tax than the rich. Sales tax rate is flat for every buyer. If you don't want to call that flat, but agree it's good, then I can agree with the good part. I'd still consider sales tax flat for everyone. :p I think currently sales tax is probably the fairest of all taxes so far...


That would apply if it was "flat rate - no deductions", but flat rate and deductions would be even worse.



Yes, my dream is to have flat tax and no more deductions. But that will kill even more accountants... so it'll likely remain a dream.

[Dicknose]

Families making below average wages should definitely get some sort of breaks, but it shouldn't be incumbent upon the rich to pay extra to feed them. Money probably will be better spent to invest in whatever they want... and hopefully end up creating more jobs.

Why shouldn't they? They can easily afford it and it makes a much bigger improvement to the poor than it does on the rich.

And that folks is what a socialist country is about - actually caring and looking after others.

Free healthcare, decent unemployment benefits, public housing, fair basic wage. And much of this is covered by a not-flat tax scheme.
You have a lot less homeless, beggars, people without basic healthcare, medical bankruptcy.

And I do love your "rich invest in what they want", like this miracle will make everything better.
Sure the US has a much bigger system of philanthropy than Australia, because its hoped the rich will donate money to causes. How much goes to Harvard and other rich colleges which dont need the money, can't actually spend that much money?? You give 1 million to Harvard and they wouldn't even blink. Give that to a community college and it would be significant. Guess where all the super duper rich donate?

The US has some of the worst wealth inequality and the system is entrenched to maintain this.
And its not just the spread between rich and middle class, the poorer people in the US are a lot worse off than in most of the socialist countries Ive listed.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why shouldn't they? They can easily afford it and it makes a much bigger improvement to the poor than it does on the rich.

And that folks is what a socialist country is about - actually caring and looking after others.

Free healthcare, decent unemployment benefits, public housing, fair basic wage. And much of this is covered by a not-flat tax scheme.
You have a lot less homeless, beggars, people without basic healthcare, medical bankruptcy.

And I do love your "rich invest in what they want", like this miracle will make everything better.
Sure the US has a much bigger system of philanthropy than Australia, because its hoped the rich will donate money to causes. How much goes to Harvard and other rich colleges which dont need the money, can't actually spend that much money?? You give 1 million to Harvard and they wouldn't even blink. Give that to a community college and it would be significant. Guess where all the super duper rich donate?

The US has some of the worst wealth inequality and the system is entrenched to maintain this.
And its not just the spread between rich and middle class, the poorer people in the US are a lot worse off than in most of the socialist countries Ive listed.

DN, rich people really can do the caring and looking after each other directly, rather than thru government intervention. Even charity organizations can have some inefficiencies, imagine the inefficiencies of the US government.

Rich people should be able take care of their own money better than a politician when it comes to help the poor. Robinhood doesn't have to answer to the rich when he steals their stuffs, but politicians have to answer to the rich you know? ;) Also, Robinhood truly gave away what he stole and gave to help the poor, but do you really trust politicians to do that?

Like I said, I'd only trust somebody like Bernie Sanders to do that. I won't trust Republicans nor will I trust pragmatic dems to really collect money and really help the poor... even if dems are in full control.

[Rare White Ape]

Man, this shit is hilarious.

Rainbowz and unicornz.

[neanderthal]

Man, this shit is hilarious.

The horseshoe theory nailed it with billi; he's a fucking republican in everything but name.

No wonder everything he says DOESN'T make sense. How can you claim to be progressive but hate paying taxes? How are those progressive policies going to be enacted without taxes?

The fuckwittery is mindblowing. Then again, I have told him many a time that he completely and utterly lacks introspection.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I’m sure you fund the police cheerfully? Cause otherwise you must be a Republican! :D

[neanderthal]

If wealth was the direct result of hard work then poor African/ Asian/ Latin American, etc women would be the richest people in the world.

Jeff Bezos got to where he was BECAUSE his parents gave him the seed money to start Amazon. Similarly, Elon's dad used to own a emerald mine in South Africa. Wealth comes from starting off with most of the advantages.

[neanderthal]

Yeah, I’m sure you fund the police cheerfully? Cause otherwise you must be a Republican! :D

I gladly pay my fucking taxes because I know how many other services and commons are funded by them. You have NEVER seen me complain about paying my taxes because that is a thing I will NEVER DO. Even if I somehow become the next multi zillionaire.

[neanderthal]

I think my favorite part was when you used a widely known tale about how the rich hoard wealth and the hero is the one that steals it from them and redistributes it to bolster your position that the rich will totally help people out and don't need to be coerced into it.

He has NO CRITICAL THINKING skills, nevermind his lack of introspection.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think my favorite part was when you used a widely known tale about how the rich hoard wealth and the hero is the one that steals it from them and redistributes it to bolster your position that the rich will totally help people out and don't need to be coerced into it.

That wasn't intended to prove that the rich are good guys nor do I believe all rich are good guys.

Rich and powerful shouldn't coerce the poor and weak to bolster themselves...

Likewise, the poor and weak shouldn't coerce the rich to bolster themselves in a more socialistic society.

No coercion should be involved... either way. I just want to play fair.

[neanderthal]

Y'all see the story about 3 boys being found in horrendous condition, and their brother had been dead for a year, his body still in the same house?

Y'all remember how progressives were going after Kamala Harris for her stand on truancy? Many people don't realise that the social services first line of defense is almost literally the education system. But go off again about truancy billi. We see you!!! ;)

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don’t remember ever talking about truancy. What exactly are you seeing?

[Dicknose]

Rich people should be able take care of their own money better than a politician when it comes to help the poor.


Oh that is so funny.
If this was true, why is poverty such a problem in the US??

Rich people will mostly help themselves.

[Crazed_Insanity]

At least rich people won’t get into huge deficits and still fail to help the poor. At least this is what happens with the US government.

How about other more socialistic governments? How many of those nations are financially rich and with plenty of surpluses? Or at least don't go into debts?

Capitalism leverages rich peoples selfish greed to continue to grow wealth for people… not just rich people like Bezos, but also investors, stock holders of Amazon, not to mention jobs and services provided. This is how Bezos took ‘care’ of people while enriching self. Of course sometimes his foundation might donate money for some tax deduction purposes, but that's usually pocket change and rarely out of the goodness of their hearts. Nevertheless, Amazon took "care" of great number of people because capitalism leverages on people's selfish greed. And this is how US as a nation grew, but Soviet union collapsed. Both nations failed to fully feed the poor, right? But maybe the other more democratic socialistic nations are doing a better job at managing their nation's money? I'm only more familiar that both Japan and Taiwan are running on deficits... quick google on Australia is showing you guys in the red too, but Sweden seems to have a surplus! So perhaps there is hope for us if somebody like Bernie Sanders takes over?

At least with current trend, US Government can only take our money and get poorer. At least they provided us with some jobs and services too. Just saying if I could, I'd definitely stop 'investing' in US government with its current trajectory... It's not as horrible as the CCP, but it's just not doing a very good job at the moment. I can certainly pay taxes as my duty, but I don't understand how others feel so glad about that duty. :p

Is being upset to pay because you know it'll be mismanaged really that wrong? We'll just agree to disagree I guess. It's good that some of you gladly pay taxes. It is definitely good to be a cheerful giver. :)

[FaultyMario]

Have you seen Kamala?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Are you referring to the space video?

If you are, I think the people on the right are being a bit too picky...

I think it's well known that I don't like Kamala, but this is not the real moonlanding... or taking a vaccine shot for public to see... this is a promotional video for kids! If Kamala appeared on the set of Sesame street, they will probably also complain about her being fake appearing with fake puppets... :p

If you're referring to something else, nevermind. :p

Biden admin really need to take special care to try to make things as genuine as possible in the future I guess. Avoid sets and paid actors please so the right can shut up about it.

[FaultyMario]

I was thinking of how the founding fathers made it so that they kept the senate for them and their friends and they created this position in the cabinet for...

You know what? Nevermind.

[Dicknose]

How about other more socialistic governments? How many of those nations are financially rich and with plenty of surpluses? Or at least don't go into debts?

Capitalism leverages rich peoples selfish greed to continue to grow wealth for people… not just rich people like Bezos, but also investors, stock holders of Amazon, not to mention jobs and services provided. This is how Bezos took ‘care’ of people while enriching self. Of course sometimes his foundation might donate money for some tax deduction purposes, but that's usually pocket change and rarely out of the goodness of their hearts. Nevertheless, Amazon took "care" of great number of people because capitalism leverages on people's selfish greed. And this is how US as a nation grew, but Soviet union collapsed. Both nations failed to fully feed the poor, right? But maybe the other more democratic socialistic nations are doing a better job at managing their nation's money? I'm only more familiar that both Japan and Taiwan are running on deficits... quick google on Australia is showing you guys in the red too, but Sweden seems to have a surplus! So perhaps there is hope for us if somebody like Bernie Sanders takes over?


I find it interesting that you talk about rich and money, but little about helping people.
Your starting position seems to be "this is their money, they should do with it what they want"
Why have taxes at all?? Why not just make everything user pays?

I think the better starting point is... what should be free/cheap to everyone?
Doesn't everyone, no matter what their situation, deserve things like - food, clothes, housing, education, medical and still have enough money for some basic enjoyment of life.
Then work out how to pay for it. And then find a method that you think is fair. And I can tell you almost no one thinks flat tax rate is fair. Its really just how steep the tax rate should be (and how much deductions can be made)

And yes sales tax looks flat - but its not when you look at what it applies to. By exempting basics like rent, food, utilities it can be skewed so that it is a long way from flat. The richer you are, the bigger the percentage of spending falls into sales tax categories.
Sales tax is often considered fair as it is not flat and harder to avoid or get deductions. Although some people still get around it, esp using things like rules that apply sales tax differently for businesses vs individuals.

Look at it this way - $100 a month can make the difference between some people eating or paying rent. To many its a nice amount for a dinner out, something they may do a few time to many times a month. To the mega rich its nothing, they wouldn't blink if they spent that much more on a bottle of wine. The massive difference in wealth and what that money means to people is obscene. These are people in the same county, under the same system. Im not saying we should all have the same amount, but we could share the wealth around a lot better and it would make a minor difference to the richest and a massive difference to the poorest. Greed is only good for those who have most of the money.

[FaultyMario]

Community college has got to be free.

If high school has been free, so must 2-year technical higher ed.

It's bonkers that there are non-low income countries that don't have it.

[Rare White Ape]

What you guys call K-12 in Australia is "free" in the sense that you don't have to pay large amounts of money to send your kids to school. But there are still school fees, books, uniforms to consider. It can still cost a family with two kids hundreds if not over a thousand per year to send their kids to public school. Private school costs tens of thousands.

For tertiary education, it's definitely not free, but there are multiple government subsidies to assist people who wish to study. I'm taking advantage of one right now - the state government is covering $4050 of my $4600 certificate III course, and it wasn't even that difficult to get approval. The investment is that I will earn money in the industry and pay tax over time, thus negating the cost of the course in the next couple of years.

The economy is a complex thing. Best to picture its pathways like a handful of spaghetti. If the government didn't take any of it and force it back into the bowl, then the amount of spaghetti available would quickly end up in the bellies of those with the biggest spoons and there'd be no spaghetti left.

Crazy when you realise that giving people with very little actually allows the richest people to get richer. There is no such thing as 'trickle down'. Churn that spaghetti!

[Tom Servo]

I'm just wondering which Joe Rogan or Jordan Peterson podcast Billi listened to recently told him that flat taxes are the best and focused on budget deficits, 'cause that's what usually what gets him hyperfocused onto one of these tangents.

[Tom Servo]

RWA - seems like K-12 is about the same as it is here, but for tertiary education, you wouldn't get a subsidy, you'd get a loan. My wife went essentially to a trade school, and it took her nearly ten years to pay off the loans to go to that.

[Crazed_Insanity]

DN, Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against sharing wealth. I’m just against forcing people to share wealth.

If stealing/cheating/robbing is morally wrong, it’s morally wrong to do that to anybody, whether rich or poor. Robin Hood may have done something popular but stealing is still morally wrong. Of course the rich in that story are wrong too, but just saying 2 wrongs don’t make it right.

There ought to be a set of fair laws applicable to everyone. Whatever the tax rate is, make it same for everyone. I don’t see how that’s wrong. Rich people don’t owe me unless they actually cheated or exploited me. Then the law should be on my side help me recover what’s fair.

This ‘fair’ set of laws needs to be applicable for everyone in order to be ‘fair’.

Lastly capitalism helps make greed more productive. China is the best experiment. No capitalism, everyone shares being poor(other than the dictator). With capitalism, everyone on the average got richer than before. Yeah, the growing gap between the rich and poor needs to be carefully balanced. Ideally nobody should be living in poverty in today’s world…

It will take a combination of capitalism and socialism for us to get there.

Swervo, I only like Peterson, Joe is okay, but I don’t consistently listen to him. :p

[Tom Servo]

Okay, so when it comes to progressive taxes, *everyone* gets taxed at the same rate for the same amount of income. If you make $30K, you pay the same amount for that $30K that someone pays who makes $300K. The latter just pays more on the higher amounts.

It is applicable to everyone. Nobody gets an adjustment.

How is that not fair?

[Crazed_Insanity]

You guys called me or flat tax as ‘wrong’. However, I still think flat tax is the fairest of them all.

As far as progressives tax goes, I’m not totally against that, but exactly who or how progressive is too progressive? How can you be sure that it doesn’t become too progressive?

At least we can both agree regressive tax is for sure wrong. We’ll just have to agree to disagree about the wrongness of flat tax.

[FaultyMario]

I'm just wondering which Joe Rogan or Jordan Peterson podcast Billi listened to recently told him that flat taxes are the best and focused on budget deficits, 'cause that's what usually what gets him hyperfocused onto one of these tangents.

Billi has brought up 'flat tax' ever since the oldest board.

[Tom Servo]

You guys called me or flat tax as ‘wrong’. However, I still think flat tax is the fairest of them all.

Why do you think that? You said "Of course if you drop the same paper money infront of a homeless person and a CEO, the two will perceive the value of that money differently. No shit. I'm not that stupid." Why is it fair then to expect the same burden for people of differing incomes?

Not directly related, but why do you think it is that it's mostly the extraordinarily wealthy that advocate for flat taxes?

[Rare White Ape]

RWA - seems like K-12 is about the same as it is here, but for tertiary education, you wouldn't get a subsidy, you'd get a loan. My wife went essentially to a trade school, and it took her nearly ten years to pay off the loans to go to that.

Trade school to us is TAFE, or anything from Cert II to diploma level. Beyond that is university where you earn degrees and Batchelor's/Master's degrees and PhDs , etc.

Trade certificates should only be worth maximum of $10,000 with 1 year of full time study. A degree will be quadruple that or more and take a number of years.

I find it crazy that it took your wife a decade to pay hers off. What was she studying and why did it cost so much? Or was it actually as cheap as I imagine and it really took that long to pay off due to the circumstances?

[FaultyMario]

Subtracting $440 from a $2,750 monthly paycheck (https://i2.wp.com/financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/top-income-earners-2015.png)leaves you with $2,310, minus $1,300 for an apartment and $300-ish for food (https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/media/file/CostofFoodSep2021LowModLib.pdf) and then, you are left with $710 for transportation, utilities and other basic needs.

Meanwhile, subtracting $1,520 from $9,500 leaves with you more options. A lot more options.

Edit: Answer to why a flat tax is not fair.

Edit2: Changed the second example from yearly to monthly.

[FaultyMario]

Trade school to us is TAFE, or anything from Cert II to diploma level. Beyond that is university where you earn degrees and Batchelor's/Master's degrees and PhDs , etc.

Trade certificates should only be worth maximum of $10,000 with 1 year of full time study. A degree will be quadruple that or more and take a number of years.

I find it crazy that it took your wife a decade to pay hers off. What was she studying and why did it cost so much? Or was it actually as cheap as I imagine and it really took that long to pay off due to the circumstances?

Cost of living is crayzee in some parts of the US. That creeps up on the service sector, higher education for example.

[Tom Servo]

I find it crazy that it took your wife a decade to pay hers off. What was she studying and why did it cost so much? Or was it actually as cheap as I imagine and it really took that long to pay off due to the circumstances?

I am lucky enough that I didn't have to take out a student loan. She was training to be a software engineer. I can tell you it wasn't cheap, and just paying off at the normal rate took that long, but I don't know all the details. I can tell you that the school was for-profit and folded soon after she graduated, then got sued for defrauding their students.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Subtracting $440 from a $2,750 monthly paycheck (https://i2.wp.com/financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/top-income-earners-2015.png)leaves you with $2,310, minus $1,300 for an apartment and $300-ish for food (https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/media/file/CostofFoodSep2021LowModLib.pdf) and then, you are left with $710 for transportation, utilities and other basic needs.

Meanwhile, subtracting $1,520 from $9,500 leaves with you more options. A lot more options.

Edit: Answer to why a flat tax is not fair.

Edit2: Changed the second example from yearly to monthly.

I understand what you are saying… rich people will definitely have more options because they just have more money! As long as the money they made isn’t illegal, it isn’t their fault that they’re rich and deserved to be penalized because they have more options!

We can tax 80, 90% out of Elon Musk and he will still have more options than me! So the next logical step is to tax Elon more until he faces the same limited options as me?

Where do you draw that ‘fair’ line?

Can you explain to me what percentage would be a fair tax rate for Elon? How about Jeff, Bill, Warren? They don’t all make the same amount, would you vary their tax rates based on…?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Why do you think that? You said "Of course if you drop the same paper money infront of a homeless person and a CEO, the two will perceive the value of that money differently. No shit. I'm not that stupid." Why is it fair then to expect the same burden for people of differing incomes?

Not directly related, but why do you think it is that it's mostly the extraordinarily wealthy that advocate for flat taxes?

Same percentage of burden seems fair to me.

Also, not directly related, why do you think BLM supporters are mostly black?

When it’s not fair, the rich can’t even complain?

But of course, they now only have higher rates on paper, they have options to hire accountants to deduct their taxes or just hide their income… so of course I don’t feel sorry for the rich. But what’s fair is fair.

We ideally should have flat tax and no deductions! If we want to give tax breaks to the poor. I have no problems with that… to help give them more options. I just don’t see why rich people need to be penalized more for being rich.

Right now, they are just not paying their fair share even with the so called progressive tax…, just to be clear, I’m only promoting flat no deductions tax. Not say we should lower the rate of the rich while also allowing them to enjoy their deductions…

Ideally, filing taxes really should be as easy as paying sales tax. Flat rate and no weaseling out of it.

[Rare White Ape]

I can tell you that the school was for-profit and folded soon after she graduated, then got sued for defrauding their students.

Oooh nasty. Similar thing used to happen here until there was a bit of reform in the industry. Google search for Evocca College and you'll see. That particular organisation became notorious.

At least your missus walked out of there with a qualification.

[Yw-slayer]

This thread just keeps on delivering on the comedy front.

[drew]

RWA - seems like K-12 is about the same as it is here, but for tertiary education, you wouldn't get a subsidy, you'd get a loan. My wife went essentially to a trade school, and it took her nearly ten years to pay off the loans to go to that.

I paid off mine after 23 years. It's beyond ridiculous.

[JoshInKC]

Here you go YW, straight from post #20349

[...] China is the best [...]

[Crazed_Insanity]

That should make YW happy! :)

[FaultyMario]

Where do you draw that ‘fair’ line?


https://youtu.be/hx5fmgIpzug

TL;DR tax until the starting lines are the levelest they can be, that is usually accomplished by a robust State that lets its citizens not worry about falling into (poverty) traps. Personal Life should be a road of effort, talent and 'luck'. Not one of start-aheads and handouts for the privileged few.

[Yw-slayer]

Here you go YW, straight from post #20349

Brah. He's ready for that dog whistle Fox stuff.

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://youtu.be/hx5fmgIpzug

TL;DR tax until the starting lines are the levelest they can be, that is usually accomplished by a robust State that lets its citizens not worry about falling into (poverty) traps. Personal Life should be a road of effort, talent and 'luck'. Not one of start-aheads and handouts for the privileged few.

What does that[bold part] mean?

What is level? How do we get there?

I'm all for pulling everyone out of poverty... nothing against that. I do believe everyone should earn living wages. For those who can't work for understandable reasons, social safety net should take care of them. For those who don't wish to work, well, that's their choice then. They shouldn't feel entitled to anything. Society doesn't owe them. To not work and expect to be taken care of is the same attitude to not wear mask nor get vaccines and expect not to get sick.

Lastly, effort, talent and luck will eventually make you richer with more options. Once you get richer and with expanded options, society should pull you back down the the same 'level' as everyone else? That's fair? Please explain that 'level' part please. Maybe I misunderstood? Also, what is starting point? We are all born in different families and with different starting points. How do you propose that we level all of our starting points? That youtube video also looks too long so didn't watch. :p

IMHO, flat rate tax won't tyrannize anybody. Progressive tax without deductions seems unfair to the rich to me... if tide turns the other way, there could be a tyranny of the poor! We are already seeing this with cancel culture. Fuck rich white people. They've oppressed us for long enough... so it's time to oppress them back!

I don't like to just cancel anybody..., if possible, we should legally find somebody guilty and then lock them up... not just have this tyranny of the mass. Everyone should learn to play fair, under the same rules and laws. No special favors. However, like I said, I have no problems giving those living under poverty special favors until they get back on their feet. I'm not against poor people... nor am I for the rich.

[neanderthal]

DN, Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against sharing wealth. I’m just against forcing people to share wealth.

If stealing/cheating/robbing is morally wrong, it’s morally wrong to do that to anybody, whether rich or poor. Robin Hood may have done something popular but stealing is still morally wrong. Of course the rich in that story are wrong too, but just saying 2 wrongs don’t make it right.

There ought to be a set of fair laws applicable to everyone. Whatever the tax rate is, make it same for everyone. I don’t see how that’s wrong. Rich people don’t owe me unless they actually cheated or exploited me. Then the law should be on my side help me recover what’s fair.

This ‘fair’ set of laws needs to be applicable for everyone in order to be ‘fair’.

Lastly capitalism helps make greed more productive. China is the best experiment. No capitalism, everyone shares being poor(other than the dictator). With capitalism, everyone on the average got richer than before. Yeah, the growing gap between the rich and poor needs to be carefully balanced. Ideally nobody should be living in poverty in today’s world…

It will take a combination of capitalism and socialism for us to get there.

Swervo, I only like Peterson, Joe is okay, but I don’t consistently listen to him. :p


How the fuck do your ... progressive ideals get implemented then?

Do you even understand that most people who made their money made it by exploiting someone else? Do you think Bezos became the richest man in the world by paying fair wages and treating his suppliers like they were his fiances' family business?

[FaultyMario]

When trying to explain inequality in the context of life course approach, it is usually done so with a metaphor of two climbers who both need to reach the summit of a mountain. Climber A starts at the bottom while Climber B starts at a sub peak. The metaphor can be further imagined with either one of the climbers being helped with Sherpas or adequate gear.

The point is that even if a meritocratic society proposes that a person's life course should be the result of good decisions and work ethic, we have proven that personal life has very little effect, and much of that is determined by factors outside the person's control, thus rendering the meritocratic ideal as pie in the sky.

Those factors are usually called conditions of origin (CoO).

Combining the mountain metaphor with motorsports terms, a climber for Haas starts way lower than a climber for Red Bull, so that conditions of origin are already unfair. So a flat tax is unfair because it doesn't take into account those conditions.

Further down the road you can expect the climber with more advantageous CoO to have a more financially rewarding life course. Starting ahead promotes higher earnings. You can take Tom's wife as an example, if she competed against another student from her same university whose CoO allowed her not be debt-ridden from tuition, the other student would most likely reach the summit first because she carried no (financial, social, emotional) burdens.

Here we go back to tax. The original purpose of taxation should be the common good. That's why we have a social compact. The sum obtained from taxation should be spent on the common good, in as much as is deemed necessary. But because we understand that tax can burden people and entities differently, we ought to charge different amounts, as is deemed possible, both in the relative and the individual.

From the history of industrial society, we know that taxation gives best results when it is used to provide people with the necessities of life, so that the providing of food, shelter and care are not stressors, because we know that when people are fed, healthy and sheltered they can more easily reach the potential of their talents. Which is good for the collective, not just for the individual.

So, in summary, when I say leveled, I mean that people can start climbing the mountain from pretty much the same place. Which doesn't mean at the bottom for everybody.

The final thought is that if every climber was asked to carry 16% of their own weight up the mountain, those who had a nutrient-deficient diet would have a harder time that those who didn't.

Am I making myself clear?

[neanderthal]

https://youtu.be/hx5fmgIpzug

TL;DR tax until the starting lines are the levelest they can be, that is usually accomplished by a robust State that lets its citizens not worry about falling into (poverty) traps. Personal Life should be a road of effort, talent and 'luck'. Not one of start-aheads and handouts for the privileged few.

To simplify for billi. (When you see equal, understand that it also means good. No use clamoring for equality if all we get is equal shit!)

All kids get equally nutritious food, get equal early education, equal primary education, equal secondary education, decent housing, clean water, safe neighborhoods, health and dental care, social services and support, equal and easy access to commons (parks, libraries, etc.) This means revising the justice system to ensure that it doesn't disproportionately jail one group of people, reforming the police to ensure they don't focus on any one group, reforming the carceral system to ensure that all inmates have opportunities to reform it chokes to death and a new system is implemented instead.

And I haven't even mentioned free college. Deliberately. I'm for it; i'm just for all those things i've mentioned first.

[Crazed_Insanity]

When trying to explain inequality in the context of life course approach, it is usually done so with a metaphor of two climbers who both need to reach the summit of a mountain. Climber A starts at the bottom while Climber B starts at a sub peak. The metaphor can be further imagined with either one of the climbers being helped with Sherpas or adequate gear.

The point is that even if a meritocratic society proposes that a person's life course should be the result of good decisions and work ethic, we have proven that personal life has very little effect, and much of that is determined by factors outside the person's control, thus rendering the meritocratic ideal as pie in the sky.

Those factors are usually called conditions of origin (CoO).

Combining the mountain metaphor with motorsports terms, a climber for Haas starts way lower than a climber for Red Bull, so that conditions of origin are already unfair. So a flat tax is unfair because it doesn't take into account those conditions.

Further down the road you can expect the climber with more advantageous CoO to have a more financially rewarding life course. Starting ahead promotes higher earnings. You can take Tom's wife as an example, if she competed against another student from her same university whose CoO allowed her not be debt-ridden from tuition, the other student would most likely reach the summit first because she carried no (financial, social, emotional) burdens.

Here we go back to tax. The original purpose of taxation should be the common good. That's why we have a social compact. The sum obtained from taxation should be spent on the common good, in as much as is deemed necessary. But because we understand that tax can burden people and entities differently, we ought to charge different amounts, as is deemed possible, both in the relative and the individual.

From the history of industrial society, we know that taxation gives best results when it is used to provide people with the necessities of life, so that the providing of food, shelter and care are not stressors, because we know that when people are fed, healthy and sheltered they can more easily reach the potential of their talents. Which is good for the collective, not just for the individual.

So, in summary, when I say leveled, I mean that people can start climbing the mountain from pretty much the same place. Which doesn't mean at the bottom for everybody.

The final thought is that if every climber was asked to carry 16% of their own weight up the mountain, those who had a nutrient-deficient diet would have a harder time that those who didn't.

Am I making myself clear?

You are clear, I agree with most of what you said except the bolded summary. We are born at different geographical locations into families of varying wealth and genetic make up... all completely out of our control. To make all of us have even 'similar' starting position is like pie in the sky too, don't you think?

We cannot guarantee everyone equal or free anything except perhaps equal rights and equal sets of laws to obey in order to minimize cheaters.

A lot of our inequalities is due to unequal rights and some people can get above the laws with special treatments... (yes, the rich are particularly evil for doing that, and I hate the cheating part of the rich, but I don't hate them simply because they're rich.)

Anyway, similar starting position is just another dream. F1 teams do not all have similar starting points. Even Indycars and Nascars do not have similar starting points. All we can do is to make sure everyone plays around with the same rules. To win championship, that's gotta be on merit... or else it'd be very boring to watch.

It'd be nice to have the stronger climber help out a weak climber, but it's quite another to think that a strong climber is wrong to not help a weaker climber. If you're nutrient deficient, I can give you nutrient to eat... then you must still climb your ass to the top yourself. It's not my moral obligation to carry you to the top because I am stronger. Everyone has 2 legs to climb the ass up. If you lost 2 legs, then sure, that's a different story. But those with strong legs are not morally obligated to carry more asses up the mountain, right? The mountain top also doesn't have enough room for everybody... I'm okay at the foothill. I can breath easier! :p If you envy those on top, go chase them down. No need to think that those assholes are wrong to leave me behind.

[Crazed_Insanity]

To simplify for billi. (When you see equal, understand that it also means good. No use clamoring for equality if all we get is equal shit!)

All kids get equally nutritious food, get equal early education, equal primary education, equal secondary education, decent housing, clean water, safe neighborhoods, health and dental care, social services and support, equal and easy access to commons (parks, libraries, etc.) This means revising the justice system to ensure that it doesn't disproportionately jail one group of people, reforming the police to ensure they don't focus on any one group, reforming the carceral system to ensure that all inmates have opportunities to reform it chokes to death and a new system is implemented instead.

And I haven't even mentioned free college. Deliberately. I'm for it; i'm just for all those things i've mentioned first.

Free college is nice. I'm not against it, but I don't think we should feel entitled to it.

Further, I think our government needs to figure out how we can help make companies pay living wages and lift all americans out of poverty 1st. Not just give welfare to those poors who feel entitled to welfare money, but to actually help lift them out of poverty and become more productive.

BTW, even when we have free college education, rest assured that not all college and universities are equal. Everything/everyone's just different and unique. No point aiming for equality that way.

Equal rights and equal laws for all. Everyone play with the same sets of rules..., then let's see who can win the championship... It's stupid to crown EVERYONE a champ because EVERYONE should be equal. Only a liberal to the extreme would believe that kind of pie in the sky. If we truly aim for equal everything, rest assured we'll all get equal shit.

[FaultyMario]

We cannot guarantee everyone equal or free anything except perhaps equal rights and equal sets of laws to obey in order to minimize cheaters.

You mean like firefighters or driving licenses where we have the different VIP and peasants' services?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I meant it's impossible for all of us to have similar CoO to begin with. Elon Musks's parents are just richer than my parents. DN is just genetically smarter than me... I don't think it's fair to make Elon's parents pay more taxes to even out their income or to force DN to smoke some marijuana to fry his brain some more... so that we can all have similar CoO.

Also, what's so wrong with being a VIP and what's so wrong with being a peasant? Of course we can't guarantee services, if a particular establishment wish to make sure they offer equally great services to all, that's cool. But as a Billi peasant walking into a fine establishment, why should I expect equally great service as Elon? Be reasonable here. You guys don't even treat me equally here as any other GTFXer! Do you hear me complaining? :p

We all have our own places in this world, we are all unique, but not equally identical as if we're clones. Be happy with where we're at... if you're not happy with where you're at... then move further up the mountain! Even if you don't have 2 legs, then crawl... if you don't have 2 arms... try to roll... we shouldn't expect others to help us as if we're entitled to it. I'd certainly appreciate all the help I can get, but I don't believe we should expect that as entitlement... fuck the rich, they got money, make them pay? I'll make them pay if they are doing illegal shit. Otherwise, I think rich should be able to keep their fair share as well. No question that they are cheating us now. I'm not here trying to help the rich save more money, just saying flat tax is pretty fair for all.

[Dicknose]

IMHO, flat rate tax won't tyrannize anybody. Progressive tax without deductions seems unfair to the rich to me...


Flat wont tyrannise anyone, but it will mean an increasing burden on the lowest incomes.
Unfair - how? They can fucking well afford it.
Making them pay 45% instead of 40% is a lot of money collected in tax, but its not that big a difference to their spending money.

Is it fair that someone earns $10 an hour, someone else earns $1000??
Or that someone can earn millions a year just sitting on their arse doing nothing?
Maybe taxing non-wage incomes at a higher rate. Tip the balance more towards those who actually work to earn their money.

How is it fair that someone can have billions while others can't afford insulin to stay alive??

But glad to see the rich have a hero to save them!!!

[Dicknose]

DN is just genetically smarter than me...
I also got 2 degrees for free. And health care for free. Yes I got some good jobs and were good at them, earned good money. But I paid taxes, as much as 47%. So I get $1000 pay rise and half goes to the govt. To help pay for all those nice things I got. Sure I made better use of them, but I was also happy to pay knowing it makes the society I live in better.

You know what never fails to surprise and scare me - when I go to the US how many people are begging on the street, at intersections even out in suburbs.
Yes we have some in Australia, but its a tiny number compared to the US. Its not something Id ever see in my suburb in Sydney. Its not that we dont have poor, but the lowest level of poor is well above the USA.
You would rarely see "crazies", people with untreated mental health issues. Go catch a bus in San Fran or the subway in NY and it almost a certainty that you will meet someone who isn't in a fit state to be out in public, but they have no easy way to get help.
Is Australia perfect - hell no. We re-introduced tertiary education fees (although the govt gives you a low interest loan that is paid in extra tax when you earn above a threshold, never earn that much, never need to pay it off). We have let some of our social programs wither - the unemployment and pension payments are not keeping up.
But we are a hell of a lot better than the US at being "fair", both in providing services and in how that cost is spread amongst the population.

Its about helping the most disadvantaged. And those who can most afford to part with the money are the richest.
Its about "fair" being based on what you can pay and the impact that has on you. 10% of income can have a big impact on poor, it will have a tiny impact on the richest.
Thats the point of progressive tax - its trying to make the impact of what you pay fair and equal. Flat does not do that, doesn't even come close.
Judge the fairness on its impact.

[neanderthal]

We cannot guarantee everyone equal or free anything except perhaps equal rights and equal sets of laws to obey in order to minimize cheaters.



SO you DON'T believe in medicare for all.

It's laughable how you're so unaware of what you say.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Medicare for all will provide basic healthcare for all. I sincerely hope it doesn’t prevent the rich from receiving more advanced and expensive treatments in the name of ‘equality’.

Now, is the rich able to afford expensive procedures ‘unfair’? I personally don’t think so. They are ‘investing’ in those new procedures now so that hopefully later on more people will be able to enjoy it more affordably or freely later.

There’s really no need to make sure we are ‘equal’ in every way or otherwise cry unfair… or feel justified to become Robinhood. Robinhood maybe popular but doesn’t make stealing right. Aladdin steals because he can’t afford basic food, but again, just because you’re poor, it doesn’t give Aladdin the right to steal.

[Rare White Ape]

When trying to explain inequality in the context of life course approach, it is usually done so with a metaphor of two climbers who both need to reach the summit of a mountain. Climber A starts at the bottom while Climber B starts at a sub peak. The metaphor can be further imagined with either one of the climbers being helped with Sherpas or adequate gear.

The point is that even if a meritocratic society proposes that a person's life course should be the result of good decisions and work ethic, we have proven that personal life has very little effect, and much of that is determined by factors outside the person's control, thus rendering the meritocratic ideal as pie in the sky.

Those factors are usually called conditions of origin (CoO).

Combining the mountain metaphor with motorsports terms, a climber for Haas starts way lower than a climber for Red Bull, so that conditions of origin are already unfair. So a flat tax is unfair because it doesn't take into account those conditions.

Further down the road you can expect the climber with more advantageous CoO to have a more financially rewarding life course. Starting ahead promotes higher earnings. You can take Tom's wife as an example, if she competed against another student from her same university whose CoO allowed her not be debt-ridden from tuition, the other student would most likely reach the summit first because she carried no (financial, social, emotional) burdens.

Here we go back to tax. The original purpose of taxation should be the common good. That's why we have a social compact. The sum obtained from taxation should be spent on the common good, in as much as is deemed necessary. But because we understand that tax can burden people and entities differently, we ought to charge different amounts, as is deemed possible, both in the relative and the individual.

From the history of industrial society, we know that taxation gives best results when it is used to provide people with the necessities of life, so that the providing of food, shelter and care are not stressors, because we know that when people are fed, healthy and sheltered they can more easily reach the potential of their talents. Which is good for the collective, not just for the individual.

So, in summary, when I say leveled, I mean that people can start climbing the mountain from pretty much the same place. Which doesn't mean at the bottom for everybody.

The final thought is that if every climber was asked to carry 16% of their own weight up the mountain, those who had a nutrient-deficient diet would have a harder time that those who didn't.

Am I making myself clear?

This beautifully explains not just wealth inequality, but also racial and marginalised people inequality.

Note that people of differing backgrounds may well have more wealth than straight white people, but they often still start on a lower footing based purely on how ‘different’ they are to straight white old men who typically hold the positions of power.

[neanderthal]

Medicare for all will provide basic healthcare for all. I sincerely hope it doesn’t prevent the rich from receiving more advanced and expensive treatments in the name of ‘equality’.

Now, is the rich able to afford expensive procedures ‘unfair’? I personally don’t think so. They are ‘investing’ in those new procedures now so that hopefully later on more people will be able to enjoy it more affordably or freely later.

There’s really no need to make sure we are ‘equal’ in every way or otherwise cry unfair… or feel justified to become Robinhood. Robinhood maybe popular but doesn’t make stealing right. Aladdin steals because he can’t afford basic food, but again, just because you’re poor, it doesn’t give Aladdin the right to steal.

Taxing the rich is not stealing. It's fucking taxes. Which you, by default, agree to pay, when you live in a society. Otherwise go find an island and live by yourself.

Contorting yourself into ever more Gordian knots, and still proving yourself wrong at every turn.

[Crazed_Insanity]

We can agree to disagree about who’s wrong. You guys still cannot give me a satisfactory answer as to how we can determine what is really fair share for the rich. Sounds like sky is the limit because they can afford it. Because the poor was hurt, we now have justification to hurt the rich. Because black lives were hurt, it’s okay to hurt white blue lives back! Because women were hurt, it’s okay to hurt men back…

I just think that’s a dangerous ideology. I’d rather we reform our messed up system and make things fairer for everyone! To my amazement, flat tax is wrong in most of your eyes… I honestly still don’t know why I’m wrong. Everyone picking up the same percentage of load that they’re capable of carrying is wrong. Go figure.

[FaultyMario]

This was the last time dude.

Why be an engineer if you excel at moving goalposts?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Flat tax is fairest imho. This goal post is just wrong I guess… let’s just move on and abandon this post! :p

[Crazed_Insanity]

Flat wont tyrannise anyone, but it will mean an increasing burden on the lowest incomes.
Unfair - how? They can fucking well afford it.
Making them pay 45% instead of 40% is a lot of money collected in tax, but its not that big a difference to their spending money.

Is it fair that someone earns $10 an hour, someone else earns $1000??
Or that someone can earn millions a year just sitting on their arse doing nothing?
Maybe taxing non-wage incomes at a higher rate. Tip the balance more towards those who actually work to earn their money.

How is it fair that someone can have billions while others can't afford insulin to stay alive??

But glad to see the rich have a hero to save them!!!

Oops, somehow I missed DN’s posts…

Anyway, I’m really not trying to be a hero and save the rich. Surely they don’t need my help. The accountants and the rich will probably all hate me if I could implement my tax plan too. Pretty sure I will be hated from both sides, but I’m seriously just trying to make it fair for all.

Life is naturally ‘unfair’. We just don’t have the same CoO as Mario pointed out and I don’t think it’s fair to level everyone to the same level as if that’s fair.

Whatever wage/income one earns, as long as he didn’t get it illegally, it should be considered fair wage. If somebody could earn a gazillion dollars/hr without doing anything illegal, why cry about it?

If somebody who cannot afford insulin to stay alive, there are lots of reasons for that… but I’m not sure if we were to implement a tax code to prevent anyone from becoming a billionaire or become too rich would actually help all the poor from getting enough to eat.

Pretty sure my government would rather get into forever wars than feed the poor.

[neanderthal]

We can agree to disagree about who’s wrong. You guys still cannot give me a satisfactory answer as to how we can determine what is really fair share for the rich. Sounds like sky is the limit because they can afford it. Because the poor was hurt, we now have justification to hurt the rich. Because black lives were hurt, it’s okay to hurt white blue lives back! Because women were hurt, it’s okay to hurt men back…

I just think that’s a dangerous ideology. I’d rather we reform our messed up system and make things fairer for everyone! To my amazement, flat tax is wrong in most of your eyes… I honestly still don’t know why I’m wrong. Everyone picking up the same percentage of load that they’re capable of carrying is wrong. Go figure.

A. FLAT. TAX. IS. REGRESSIVE. Get that through your head. Handicapped people should crry their share of the load. Great, ... you're ablist (anti disability folk) as fuck too.


re·gres·sive
/rəˈɡresiv/
Learn to pronounce
See definitions in:
All
Psychology
Finance
Philosophy
adjective
1.
becoming less advanced; returning to a former or less developed state.
"the regressive, infantile wish for the perfect parent of early childhood"
2.
(of a tax) taking a proportionally greater amount from those on lower incomes.
"indirect taxes are, as a group, regressive"

Read the bolded part. It's literally defined!!!

[Taimar]

Get that through your head.

You'd need Death Star levels of power to penetrate though that numb skull.

"Crazed Insanity" is meant literally.

[neanderthal]

Is billi paying attention? (https://twitter.com/JamesMWilliam18/status/1454494984720289792?t=twVfIU24xEtYKeNX9Lbl_g&s=19)

[Tom Servo]

Hey, the rare Taimar appearance! Good to see you!

[FaultyMario]

Hi Alex!

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes, good to see you again Taimar! I guess we have my numb skull to thank? ;)

Anyway, maybe I am crazy that I believe there are 3 types of taxes? Progressive, proportional and regressive. However I understand many of you believe there are only 2, and flat/proportional tax fall under regressive and I totally get your reasonings.

Now I’m just curious exactly what this fair ‘curve’ between progressive and regressive looks like to you guys… or how can it be properly defined?

[Tom Servo]

In the latest example of moving the goalposts, you must believe that only flat taxes are fair unless you can come up with the optimum progressive tax that pleases Billi.

But just to the take bait - taxes that make it so the lowest wage earners make enough that they can afford housing, food, healthcare, and furthering their education, even if that means taxing the richest to help subsidize those things. Adjust as necessary, preferably while ignoring anybody who utters the words "trickle down."

There are lots of good examples to look at. Emulate those and adjust, erring to the side of taxing the rich because the consequences for them are less severe than for those that are barely able to provide for their basic necessities.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Erring on the side to make the rich pay more sounds reasonable but still not fair, right?

If we could really find this magical progressive tax curve that fair for all, I can definitely abandon my flat tax idea.

Anyway, right now, although we supposedly have a progressive tax system, special deductions still make things particularly unfair for the middle class. I think to further change goal posts, we really need to only allow tax breaks/deductions to lower than average income earners and make the rest of us pay according to the ‘fair’ curve. No exceptions.

[Tom Servo]

Nope, sounds fair to me.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think my problem is that I define words differently compared to you guys?

To me, if we’re erring to make anybody pay extra, that’s just not quite fair.

Plus, not all rich are like Jeff Epstein. Those type of rich could all die and I wouldn’t care, but don’t forget Elon Musk spent his own money developing his rockets! He was down to his last rocket and if that final launch failed, he’d have to close shop and we’d never have SpaceX. Imagine if we taxed Elon a bit more to cause him to close shop earlier?

Tesla was close to bankruptcy many times as well. Yeah, even if Elon failed both of his companies, I’m sure he’d still do very well and probably better off than most of us…

But this world would be without Tesla and SpaceX!!!

So it’s not like taking away money from the rich is totally without consequences.

[Tom Servo]

Not sure if the link will work, LA Times doesn't seem to have the same sharing capability that NYTimes and WaPo have.

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html

Elon Musk's companies, as of 2015, had received just shy of $5 billion in government subsidies. That seems very unfair, where's my $5 billion? I wonder how much of that he tanked in his own net worth when he baselessly publicly accused someone of being a pedophile just because the guy (correctly) mocked his stupid submarine idea?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Okay, so it’s open season for goal posts, right? To me, pedo comment is probably better than actually being one? He also didn’t initiate the mean tweets. Anyway, 2015 is already when he has managed to turn his laugh stock pie in the sky companies into viable companies. If you can employ a bunch of people, you can probably get some govt subsidies too? There’s no reason why if you are a major employer who needs help and your government ends up gladly seeing you fail without giving you some sort of helping hand to save some jobs?

My justifications for flat tax really has nothing to do with any of these things… I think they’re separate issues? But I can understand why some of you hate Elon just because he’s now rich and have so many options all because he had a better CoO than most of us and now richer than most of us so it okay to take more money away from him?

[FaultyMario]

Elon Musk's mind is full of stupid ideas. He's got great connections, though.


https://youtu.be/9hoAwNZoS8o

[Tom Servo]

I'm just saying that a) Elon isn't the saint you seem to think he is, but similarly, b) you don't get taxed based on how good of a person you are. You might get fined for violating the law, but your tax rate doesn't change based on some algorithm that determines your worthiness as a person. I'm not aware of any tax code that would tax Epstein more than Musk.


Anyway, 2015 is already when he has managed to turn his laugh stock pie in the sky companies into viable companies. If you can employ a bunch of people, you can probably get some govt subsidies too? There’s no reason why if you are a major employer who needs help and your government ends up gladly seeing you fail without giving you some sort of helping hand to save some jobs?

Doesn't this completely invalidate your point that if we tax Musk too much, that he might launch his last rocket and not be able to afford any more? (I'm honestly not entirely certain, I had a hard time parsing that last sentence there, but I think you were arguing that the government would subsidize you if it meant a lot of people losing their jobs.)

I think my biggest problem with your fairness argument is that it cherry picks the fair part. Nothing else in the capitalist system is "fair." It even just picks which part of a tax system you think is fair - Musk still gets taxed exactly the same on his first $100K of income as someone making $100K.

We have a wealth gap problem that is only getting worse. Raising taxes on the poor while lowering it on the rich will only exacerbate that. That might be fair to the people living now, but what about their kids? If the playing field continues to be less and less level, where's the fairness in that?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Swervo, never tried to paint Elon as a Christian saint. He’s likely not a very good husband nor a good dad. A fair tax code is should also not give special considerations whether someone is good or bad. Everyone should just pay their fair share, whether if you’re Jeff Epstein or Jeff Bezos or Jeff nobody. Now if you are really bad and did something illegal, then you’ll be forced to pay more than just taxes.

Also I am well aware of the wealth gap. This is an inevitability in a capitalistic society, hence I do believe we need socialism to balance things out a bit.

I AM antiestablishment, remember? Who are the ‘establishment’? Do you really think Elon is part of that? Maybe he will eventually be part of it and become just as a cancerous tumor sucking up resources without contributing to anything productive, but at least I don’t believe Elon’s there yet.

Anyway, enough about Elon… wealth, power gaps IMHO just cannot be completely avoided! People shouldn’t be drowning in poverty, but as long as the rich make their honest buck, I don’t think we should put a cap on how much they can take home such as steal rob or assess huge progressive taxes on them.

Equality in that respect is just unreasonable. Even in Star Trek universe, everyone can’t possibly get to command their equally sized starships! Captain Picard and Lt. Barkley are simply not equals!

There are also people who’d gladly give majority of their money away such as Bezos ex wife! The difference is she’s doing that willingly. Not being robbed by people nor the government.

Speaking of governments, US government definitely won’t spend our tax dollars wisely. Having them rob from the rich simply to fatten our politicians up? Or to invade other nations unjustly? No thanks.

Back to our initial discussion, for me to fork over my tax dollars cheerfully, regardless of % amount, I’d gladly hand over 100% of my income if we all could be taken care of. Knowing that we don’t have to worry about getting sick, what our next meal is gonna be, shelter over my head that’s not a dump, and something interesting to work on and be a contributor and of course decent education for my kid.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Elon Musk's mind is full of stupid ideas. He's got great connections, though.


https://youtu.be/9hoAwNZoS8o

Boy you like to post long videos… :p

Anyway, one of the main reason why I like capitalism is that people can invest their own money on their own stupid ideas!

If it works out, great! They get to make money! If it fails, oh well, and they lose their own money! Of course we could technically still try to find other investors to fund our ideas, but back to Elon… I’m not sure I would fund Tesla and SpaceX in the very beginning because I’ve seen so many failed ventures before him.

One of the biggest reasons why I admire him is that I think he pulled something nearly impossible off!

I think even his ‘friends’ were trying to persuade him to not waste his own money! Besides EV, who was ever successful at starting up a new car company in recent history? I’ve also seen and heard of so many failed rocket ventures… and he what? He wants to land and reuse rockets?!?!

How stupid and crazy that is!?!?!?

Anyway, I have accomplished very little in life professionally so I can take comments like my ideas are crazy and stupid…

However, what makes you so qualified to judge Elon Musk’s ideas?

[Tom Servo]

You have 100% tried to paint Elon Musk as this paragon that we should aspire to. Besides that, then you tried to say we should be not tax him as much as an absolute monster like Epstein. That was your point, not mine.


There are also people who’d gladly give majority of their money away such as Bezos ex wife! The difference is she’s doing that willingly. Not being robbed by people nor the government.

You can already write that off and pay less in taxes. We already have systems in place if you feel like you know better where your charitable giving should be going.

[JoshInKC]

Billi - If someone is worth more than a Billion dollars, they are by definition the establishment.
A billionaire painting* himself as anti-establishment is like someone claiming they're "not a basketball player, or even a real athlete" when they've just crushed the lakers 120-3 all by their lonesome.

[Dicknose]

Ok - so why is a flat income tax not fair?
Because the percentage it would need to be to fund things would be crushing for people on a lower income.

It would be great if we could say "oh its 15% for everyone", but that wouldn't be enough.
By the time you get it to an amount that would work, the poor people would be worse off and need more support. You could add more support, tax breaks for them etc. But then need money to fund that, so up the rates. And then increase breaks and subsidies for the low end.
In the end to have a decent balance you would have changed it into a progressive system...

This is about as flat as I think you could do...
lets pick the amount of money we think you need to survive to a decent level.
Then you put a flat rate that starts above that amount.
Say $20k as a basic income. Then tax at 20% for every dollar above that.
Tweek the numbers, but that could be a workable system, would look "flatish" but is actually progressive in terms of average tax rate (doesn't pass most definitions as the marginal rate is flat)
That is probably as flat as you could make the system.
It could treat different income sources at different rates (but still flat). So wages would be different to capital gains or investment income. I would suggest that these should be taxed higher than wages. That would also have the effect of being progressive, as these other sources of income as more common for large income earners. Need to be careful on retired folk - as these would be their only income, so the "basic income" deduction should still be able to be applied, but needs to be applied to the lowest tax rate items first (ie must deduct from wages before investments)

Personally I still think that is not fair. An extra dollar to the bottom end is still more important than at the top end, so they can afford to be taxed more of that extra dollar.
But this style is used in some places.

Or you know you could just massively increase min wages and ripple thru increases above that...
So that they could afford to pay the same tax rate.
Instead of this fabled "tickle down", how about "grow up"

[Crazed_Insanity]

You have 100% tried to paint Elon Musk as this paragon that we should aspire to. Besides that, then you tried to say we should be not tax him as much as an absolute monster like Epstein. That was your point, not mine.



You can already write that off and pay less in taxes. We already have systems in place if you feel like you know better where your charitable giving should be going.

If I gave that impression, perhaps it’s due to my personal admiration of Elon’s companies? I do wish more people could start up more similar companies… anyway, I’m certainly not saying he’s in the same league as Jesus on a personal level, ok? :p

I was also not trying to propose different tax rates for Elon and Epstein, just saying all billionaires are not alike. I understand there are a lot of evil rich people, but I just wish to be equally fair with everyone.

With regard to Bezos ex wife, I’m sure she not just seeking tax write offs, she is seriously giving her wealth away because she knows she really doesn’t need that much money! That is truly admirable. If only more rich people are like that, we would not be discussing this… ;)

[Crazed_Insanity]

Billi - If someone is worth more than a Billion dollars, they are by definition the establishment.
A billionaire painting* himself as anti-establishment is like someone claiming they're "not a basketball player, or even a real athlete" when they've just crushed the lakers 120-3 all by their lonesome.

Again, I might be definition challenged… the ‘establishment’ that I am against is(are) the one(s) who has(have) the power to engage in forever wars, or the power to mess around Wall St and decide which is small enough to fail and which is too important to fail and the power to pardon those crooks on Wall St… the power to print more money and decide who to give it to…

I really think Elon is way to obsessed with his own projects to care about all that other stuffs at the moment. I’m also not sure if Elon is spending money actively buying politicians…

Elon for sure isn’t helping narrowing the gap between rich and poor, but I do believe at least he’s helping raising the average up higher and being productive. Even Warren Buffet isn’t as productive, not to mention lots of hedge fund managers are actually counterproductive.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Ok - so why is a flat income tax not fair?
Because the percentage it would need to be to fund things would be crushing for people on a lower income.

It would be great if we could say "oh its 15% for everyone", but that wouldn't be enough.
By the time you get it to an amount that would work, the poor people would be worse off and need more support. You could add more support, tax breaks for them etc. But then need money to fund that, so up the rates. And then increase breaks and subsidies for the low end.
In the end to have a decent balance you would have changed it into a progressive system...

This is about as flat as I think you could do...
lets pick the amount of money we think you need to survive to a decent level.
Then you put a flat rate that starts above that amount.
Say $20k as a basic income. Then tax at 20% for every dollar above that.
Tweek the numbers, but that could be a workable system, would look "flatish" but is actually progressive in terms of average tax rate (doesn't pass most definitions as the marginal rate is flat)
That is probably as flat as you could make the system.
It could treat different income sources at different rates (but still flat). So wages would be different to capital gains or investment income. I would suggest that these should be taxed higher than wages. That would also have the effect of being progressive, as these other sources of income as more common for large income earners. Need to be careful on retired folk - as these would be their only income, so the "basic income" deduction should still be able to be applied, but needs to be applied to the lowest tax rate items first (ie must deduct from wages before investments)

Personally I still think that is not fair. An extra dollar to the bottom end is still more important than at the top end, so they can afford to be taxed more of that extra dollar.
But this style is used in some places.

Or you know you could just massively increase min wages and ripple thru increases above that...
So that they could afford to pay the same tax rate.
Instead of this fabled "tickle down", how about "grow up"

Yeah, I understand and agree with most of what you’re saying, I’m really not insisting the poor to pay a flat rate, but to make sure the rich to pay at least a flat rate. Maybe allow rich to take deductions but once you reach this flat rate level, sorry, no matter how good of accountant you can hire, you’ll have to pay that amount, your fair share!!! At the moment with our supposedly progressive tax code, rich could get away with paying no taxes. Surely we can all agree that isn’t fair!

Flat rate should just be like the very minimum one has to pay. For those making below average income, they should be able to take more tax breaks or deductions automatically without the need to hire any accountants…

Anyway, just hope you guys understand that I’m not trying to be a hero for the rich. They absolutely don’t need me to save them. :p

[dodint]

Ok - so why is a flat income tax not fair?...Personally I still think that is not fair. An extra dollar to the bottom end is still more important than at the top end, so they can afford to be taxed more of that extra dollar.
But this style is used in some places.


In the US low-income pay no tax, often having an effective negative tax rate. That doesn't seem fair either.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I do know some rich chinese immigrants who live in affluent neighborhoods, but because they're rich so they don't need jobs/income/, they can often hide their money outside of the US and home titles under the name of their kids... so not only do they pay no taxes, but they also get to enjoy all the benefits of the poorer population.

This is why I thought sales tax and property tax are the fairest. If you really choose to live poorly or modestly and pay less taxes, that's cool. However, if you're rich and disguise yourself as poor and actually take the benefits intended for the poor, that's just not right. Welfare services really need to check people's addresses before handing out benefits... then again the rich could probably come up with a poorer address...

Or else we just stop welfare system and have UBI... so everyone gets something. Then that's fair. The tiny amount of money the rich received would be insignificant and will be taxed right back anyways..., but the poor who received the payments could help lift them out of poverty. Giving the poor direct income tax cuts would also let them get fatter paychecks right away... rather than government writing out welfare checks to some lame ass rich people. Government wastes could be due to its inefficiencies, but there are also a lot of fraud going on. Anyway, these are probably just small pocket change for the government compared to forever wars. However, if we're shooting for becoming more 'fair', these things do need to be addressed.

Now if you're actually poor and paid no taxes, yeah, that's not fair either, but I'm all for giving them help so that they're not drowning below poverty line. In such case, I'd be glad to pay such tax.

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://news.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/un-says-6b-worlds-billionaires-031016473.html

UN pleading with billionaires to help the dying poor. Elon Musk says he’s willing to donate the billions needed if UN can show its math correctly. Shouldn’t be too hard if UN has done actual research.

If UN has done it’s math correctly and Musk is for real, then I guess poverty around the world will end soon. ;)

Btw, even if Elon and UN truly ended poverty around the world, the guy is still not a saint. $6billion is just a tiny fraction of his wealth and his wealth is still growing…

[mk]

In the US low-income pay no tax, often having an effective negative tax rate. That doesn't seem fair either.

Then you probably feel that you are paying too much.
Or at least I felt that way.

My solution was cutting expenses.
Nowadays I'm pretty indifferent.

Now I'm less indifferent towards "immoral" laws.
Like new surroundings by state for nut cases of sorts, again and again.
There should be a less expensive "concentration" solution, including free hallucinogen of preference.
Though no idea what is the current estimated net cost, like cost of unemployed construct workers for missing demolished apartments and so on.

[dodint]

It's straying a bit from the flat tax discussion, but if I were 'king for a day' and could implement sweeping policy change I'd prefer to do something with Universal Basic Income. Specifically, redirect much of our grossly bloated defense spending and the cost of administering different entitlement programs (welfare, disability, etc) towards paying a UBI that would enable people to have their basic needs met. Tie it to a consumer index so it fluctuates with wherever you are geographically (similar to the military housing allowance which is tied to rental rates by zipcode) so it's fair regardless of region. Pay enough for the basics and if people choose to remain at that level that is their choice. Most would still try to raise themselves up, I believe.
My thought is that freeing people from the struggle of just trying to survive will free them up to pursue vocations and even innovations that will ultimately benefit society on the whole.

But, it comes across as socialist so it probably won't happen here in my lifetime. As a taxpayer I'd rather have my money go back to the people in my community rather than to the Research & Development department of some defense contractor who is making some obscure weapon to fight an enemy that doesn't exist. And I'm someone that used to make a lot of money working for a defense contractor. ;)

[Crazed_Insanity]

I could get behind a 'king' like that.

UBI isn't really 'socialistic', is it? It's not like we're giving money just to the poor, we're giving it to everybody. Like Andrew Yang has pointed out, Alaska, a red state, has no problem with redistributing oil profits to all of its citizens and don't consider that as socialism.

Anyway, even if the conservatives do agree UBI isn't socialism, the rich establishment most likely won't buy into UBI because they prefer trickle down economy, not bubbling up economy of UBI. Seriously, 'bubbling up' probably works better to boost economy because the poor will have to spend their UBI, where as during quantitative easing, banks often hoard the free money government gave them.

Back to Mario's analogy of CoO, we probably need to help those living under the sea level of poverty so that they don't drown. UBI really is the best solution IMHO. It can be distributed much efficiently and without any stigmas compared to welfare checks. Those who are handicapped to climb mountains can be given wheel chairs or whatever to help/tools they need to climb, but each individual will have to climb up themselves. Nobody is entitled to a free ride. For the rich who were born near the mountain top with fancy SUV's and helicopters... it'd be nice if they could give us a ride up, but I don't think they're obligated to help us. We also don't need to drag them down to our level in the name of 'equality'. Life just isn't fair or equal like that..., that's the reality we need to accept. What we can aim for is equal rights and equality under the law. Our set of laws should see kings and peasants the same as human beings, no special privileges just because you're so special... Even Jesus himself was not above God's laws. God also let Jesus be born in a manger rather than mountain top. Where you are born is irrelevant. Where do you end up is more important. What will be our CoF? (Condition of Finality?)

[Rare White Ape]

My thought is that freeing people from the struggle of just trying to survive will free them up to pursue vocations and even innovations that will ultimately benefit society on the whole.

I’m proof of this. I thought I’d squander my entire injury time sitting on my arse but I’ve taken up a study course and will get myself a better job for when I do go back to work.

Lots of people on a UBI wouldn’t do squat but without firm statistics at-hand I wouldn’t know how many… nor would I give a flying fuck. I’d happily let people be lazy if they choose just so that I get the choice to do the same. Which is 100% fair.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, combination of min wage and UBI should lift people above poverty levels so that they won't have to constantly worry about their next meal and plan what to do with their lives.

If they wish to remain as lazy bums, that's certainly their choice. If they wish to climb the mountain, not just to be richer, but to contribute to society, that'd be great too! This 'mountain' should NOT be all about money, but about making our lives more meaningful. Our world is obviously broken and a lot of repair works are needed...

[2ndMoparMan]

I am reminded of a scene from History of the world Part 1....

[neanderthal]

It's straying a bit from the flat tax discussion, but if I were 'king for a day' and could implement sweeping policy change I'd prefer to do something with Universal Basic Income. Specifically, redirect much of our grossly bloated defense spending and the cost of administering different entitlement programs (welfare, disability, etc) towards paying a UBI that would enable people to have their basic needs met. Tie it to a consumer index so it fluctuates with wherever you are geographically (similar to the military housing allowance which is tied to rental rates by zipcode) so it's fair regardless of region. Pay enough for the basics and if people choose to remain at that level that is their choice. Most would still try to raise themselves up, I believe.
My thought is that freeing people from the struggle of just trying to survive will free them up to pursue vocations and even innovations that will ultimately benefit society on the whole.

But, it comes across as socialist so it probably won't happen here in my lifetime. As a taxpayer I'd rather have my money go back to the people in my community rather than to the Research & Development department of some defense contractor who is making some obscure weapon to fight an enemy that doesn't exist. And I'm someone that used to make a lot of money working for a defense contractor. ;)

How do we get you on that throne?!?!?

No, not THAT one!

Your kingdom sounds like a place where everybody has their basic needs met, and has the opportunity to go out and get some more, if they want to.

Long live the King!

[neanderthal]

I am reminded of a scene from History of the world Part 1....

I was shaking my head ...

[JSGeneral]

I am reminded of a scene from History of the world Part 1....

I am reminded of The Ballad of Peter Pumpkinhead. Though the more I think about it, I'm pretty sure Peter knew what was going to happen to him and did it anyway.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I am reminded of The Ballad of Peter Pumpkinhead. Though the more I think about it, I'm pretty sure Peter knew what was going to happen to him and did it anyway.

My God! Where have I been? I've never heard of that song nor the band until just now on youtube... thanks for the tip. :p

[mk]

Any idea why Minneapolis didn't kick their racist police out?

I'm also wondering the head internals of Winsome Sears.
Better be in than out maybe.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I'm assuming people don't really want to defund the police because they still want police to also fight crime? Not all black people are thugs, but there are thugs around. Yes, there are corrupt and racist police, but there are also police who keeps order. Anyway, don't know the exact details of Minneapolis' election was really about, but I'm sure voters still want police reform?

As for the Virginia governor's race, I hope DNC learns from its mistakes and stop this kind of loses in the future.

Biden won that state by 10%, yet this time, moderates turned republican. Why? Because of Critical Race Theory. The single issue Republicans used to galvanize Trump voters without having to use Trump's name.

I understand Biden won it thanks to black voters, but American population consists more than just black people. Yes, we shouldn't be racist, but there's also no need to be too 'racist' against white people... I think republicans probably tried to go out of their way to prove that they're not racists by voting for a black Lt. Governor?

Virginia really should be bluer. DNC need to strategize better... to help the minorities, without pissing off the majority.

[Tom Servo]

The problem is that CRT isn't being taught in anything outside of college-level or higher law schools and we've reached a point where teaching actual history is now deemed as too racist against white people.

There's a video clip running around right now of a man in VA being interviewed about the election. He's asked what the most important thing is for him when it comes to the governor's race, and he says it's CRT. The interviewer then asks him what CRT is, and he can't answer. Then he's asked well, even if you don't know the precise definition, what's bad about it and once again, he doesn't know.

How do you campaign to people who willfully just want to remain ignorant?

[Crazed_Insanity]

It's kinda like vaccine mandate I guess. Dem candidate insists on mandate on kids, insist on government knows better than parents. You guys are just too stupid! Whereas GOP candidate promises to give parents the choice, you guys know better what's best for your kids. You can inject bleach if you want to!

What to do in such a democratic society?

When significant number of population is willfully acting ignorant, what are the party leaders suppose to do? Just laugh at them and think of them as stupid deplorables and then allow the political opposition to take advantage of that and win?

Liberals are supposedly more diverse and accepting of different kinds of people. If DNC truly acts that way, they should easily win majority of the votes.

I think this comes back to the 'famous' quote from somebody... to paraphrase... "I do not tolerate those who are intolerant!" I think such thinking is what's hurting the dems. It's like we need to be politically correct and treat everyone nicely on this planet... except rich, white, males. CRT isnt quite being taught in schools but its ideology has already permeated our culture. (You're right about CRT being college level course, majority of professors are heavily liberal leaning and brain washed plenty of college kids to think this way.) Rich white males exploited this world and got rich. It's time to get them back in order to level the playing field!

That kind of thinking isn't completely wrong, but we have to realize there are a lot of white males who are not that rich nor privileged. Racism is racism. It shouldn't be more acceptable to be a racist against white people. Members of KKK or NeoNazi should be a minority in the US. At least that's what I believe.

Cancel culture and defunding the police is essentially movements very similar to that 'ideology'. Because they hurt us, we're going to hurt them back and drag them down to our same level so that we can truly all be 'equal'! We need to reform in a way without trying to hurt each other. I think most of the conservative white people are just fighting against racism against white people... rather than promoting KKK or Nazism. After all, most of those stupid white people should know that they fought a war against the Nazis? However if we keep on allowing CRT or similar theories to permeate our culture, maybe more white people will be pushed to become a nazi or join kkk just for self preservation?

At the moment, I think money runs supreme. You can be better than other people if you're rich. Don't matter what color is your skin... and naturally poor people will tend to want to cancel you when they get a chance... point is I don't think there are a lot of white supremacists left in this world.

If GOP comes up with a black trump candidate, DNC will have no answer against such a candidate. ;)

I wish candidates can eventually get back to real issues and how they plan on solving them... rather than all these BS.

I think we can learn a lot from Mercedes F-1 team. I recall they have a culture of solving problems rather than placing blames. Identify problems and learn from that and fix it. Assessing blames on anybody is a waste of time and counterproductive. If a Nazi company and a black driver can achieve this much success, if our nation could learn to do similarly, for sure we can be even more awesome.

[Jason]

- No one knows what CRT is, or has a clear definition
- If they do have a definition, no one has clearly defined why it’s bad
- It’s not being taught in VA schools
- It’s not part of the Democratic platform

So frankly, Republicans brought it into light, made it into a big deal, and got white suburbanites and rural voters worked up about it. Meanwhile Democrats are :?

[Tom Servo]

The GOP do seem really good at finding something that makes their base insecure and inventing a bogeyman to get them riled up. The fact that it's often becoming straight up "great replacement" white supremacist nonsense or being mad about teaching accurate history instead of jingoism isn't exactly uplifting.

It reminds me of a lot of people out here who freak out about "government overreach" and anti-mask mandates. I keep hearing that it's clearly a power grab because there's no clear guideline on how rules get pushed back. There are two things that make me not that worried about that:

1) Usually a bit after instituting new rules, there are specific benchmarks set out to have those rules rolled back. They just did it again with the mask mandates here in LA - clear benchmarks of case rates, hospitalizations, etc.

2) We keep ending up in this situation because the state and county have been *too quick* to roll things back. We reopened completely back in mid-June and that's when cases starting spiking again. We've done it again and again. Heck, even with rolling back rules earlier this year after the winter surge, they actually made the benchmarks more lenient so we could actually reach them. The government here has shown every sign that it wants to repeal these things, but every time they do the case load goes up and we have to bring at least some of it back to get things under control.

Now I've got neighbors that think that 5G towers will kill them and I'm just so goddamn tired of people believing absolute nonsense in the face of all evidence.

[Rare White Ape]

These people who believe nonsense, don’t be mad at them. Be mad at the system that spent decades purposefully keeping them stupid so that they could be lied to.

Remember that only proper rich people should be voting for the GOP. That threshold is getting higher and higher to the point that even millionaires are shooting themselves in the foot by voting for them. And if people have the nous to accumulate a million bucks worth of assets and other things in 2021 (not super dooper hard these days with careful manoeuvring and two good incomes) and they’re STILL being conned into voting conservative, then you know the system is rigged.

[Tom Servo]

That's a very good point. I try really not to be mad at them, but mad at the people who take advantage of them. I'm still tired of it though.

[Crazed_Insanity]

- No one knows what CRT is, or has a clear definition
- If they do have a definition, no one has clearly defined why it’s bad
- It’s not being taught in VA schools
- It’s not part of the Democratic platform

So frankly, Republicans brought it into light, made it into a big deal, and got white suburbanites and rural voters worked up about it. Meanwhile Democrats are :?

I've often get into lots of arguments here because of unclear or varying definitions of words... we often can't even agree on word definitions, let alone figuring out exactly what CRT is.

Point is humans are not vulcans. We vote with our emotions. What is the sentiment behind this BS CRT or Q or 5G or whatever other BS?

It's distrust.

Both right and left do not trust those in power or the establishment in different ways. I do agree the red people are causing lots of problems, but blue people can stop playing innocent or acting all confused as if is all the fault of the other side.

When I brought up flat tax, you guys are like no you stupid! We NEED to tax the rich MORE! As if rich people owe it to society. Yes, they can afford it better than most of us, but why is it okay to force to charge them more? They can afford it doesn't mean it's fair. Why is it okay to cancel CEO's and politicians and COMEDIANS without due process? Even Neanderthal doesn't believe we should defund the police but that's what a lot of folks on the left are pushing. These social justice warriors are not seeking true justice, but more like revenge! Naturally those who are rich white and male are fighting back. Of course not the liberal ones. Liberal rich white males will humbly accept their sins politically correctly and maybe secretly hate themselves and their ancestral past.

There's just a huge hypocrisy on the left that you guys are blinded with. You can agree with people self identifying with whatever gender they want, yet, somebody like Jordan Peterson who self identifies as a liberal is seemed as a conservative hack.

Because the LGBTQIA community had been oppressed before... now it's okay to oppress other people's speech... you must use these pronouns or else you are a homophobe or just phobe of somekind?

We just need to learn how to be fair and just with everyone somehow.

[Tom Servo]

When I brought up flat tax, you guys are like no you stupid! We NEED to tax the rich MORE!

I want to call this out. I stopped responding about this because you eventually described a progressive tax system and then called it a flat tax. Your main beef seemed to be with the fact that the rich can duck out of taxes through various loopholes. It's something we pretty much all agree on, except that "flat tax" has a precise definition and what you finally described wasn't that. Figured I'd be nice and not do an "I told you so", but again, especially when dealing with only written words, precision is important. CRT is defined. 5G is defined. Q is...well, Q is whatever the fuck it is this week. But we know what they are, and we can communicate because what we know what they are. I won't say blue people are innocent, but I think we're perfectly within our rights to act confused if people are going to arbitrarily redefine words to be whatever they want them to be.

This almost feels like someone claiming they don't believe in evolution, and you say "you don't believe that we've evolved from more primitive lifeforms through natural selection and genetic mutation" and they're like "No, I'm saying I don't believe fish are real!"

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyway, I just think the 'wave' that pussy grabber rode into town on was also amplified by the left. If we double down on this 'confusion', more and more trump-like candidates will win.

Root cause of that anti-establishment sentiment was of course due to the Establishment fucking around with us too much. However, American people now are just too busy fight with each other to care what the establishment is up to.

[dodint]

I want to call this out. I stopped responding about this because you eventually described a progressive tax system and then called it a flat tax. Your main beef seemed to be with the fact that the rich can duck out of taxes through various loopholes. It's something we pretty much all agree on, except that "flat tax" has a precise definition and what you finally described wasn't that. Figured I'd be nice and not do an "I told you so", but again, especially when dealing with only written words, precision is important. CRT is defined. 5G is defined. Q is...well, Q is whatever the fuck it is this week. But we know what they are, and we can communicate because what we know what they are. I won't say blue people are innocent, but I think we're perfectly within our rights to act confused if people are going to arbitrarily redefine words to be whatever they want them to be.

This almost fields like someone claiming they don't believe in evolution, and you say "you don't believe that we've evolved from more primitive lifeforms through natural selection and genetic mutation" and they're like "No, I'm saying I don't believe fish are real!"

What if it is a Jesus fish?

[Tom Servo]

I don't know if I should be happy or sad that when I try to come up with some "this is completely unrelated nonsense", I still manage to somehow make it related.

[Crazed_Insanity]

What if it is a Jesus fish?

Yeah, that doesn’t make sense at all. Loaves of bread and fish must be real! Jesus multiplied them!

Anyway, personally, I’d continue to ask and try to understand why he doesn’t believe fishes are real. Maybe this guy is crazy, maybe I’ll learn something new.

[Dicknose]

UBI isn't really 'socialistic', is it? It's not like we're giving money just to the poor, we're giving it to everybody.

Its extremely socialistic.
While it is "for everyone", in the end the richer end is taxed more than they get and hence are taxed to pay for the bottom end.
Almost no point starting income tax until you are above the UBI, otherwise you are simply just lowering the UBI.

There is some reasonable murmuring about doing it here. Replace most of age pension, unemployment, disability pension with a UBI. You might still need to top some things up, esp disability services but that wouldn't be as income. Its often considered good as it can make the difference between low paid work and unemployment bigger - as both are now getting the UBI so any work gives you more. The downside is that this gap between UBI and UBI+basic wage could cause inflation and push prices up.
Tricky to manage that, enough of a gap to incentivise working, but not so much of a gap that you are just redefined the poverty level.

[Rare White Ape]

Bit of a flippant comment here but economies around the world are struggling to avoid a recession. I don’t think inflation is a problem we need to worry about. It’s probably a bogey man thrown about to avoid giving poor people money.

I asked my mum about this. She’s a qualified accountant. She had no answer that could satisfy my query.

[FaultyMario]

It cannot be made clear enough that if Democrats do not actually make people's lives tangibly better in the next few months, Republicans will win in 2022, Biden will accomplish nothing in his entire term, and Donald Trump will win in 2024.

Whichever political faction manages to transcend idiotic culture war bickering, leaves behind the pieties of the neoliberal age, and offers a real program to combat the popular immiseration that most Americans have experienced since the 1970s – the future belongs to them.

If that doesn't happen, and nothing changes, then the future is a continuation of the last 50 years: decay and rot. Elites loot a hollowed-out state (90s Russia), while a vast "surplus population" is segregated into prisons and slums: life expectancy drops more. Misery and debt.

Yes, Gravel Institute, but... the 90s didn't have raising sea levels, traumatic weather seasons and crazy pathogens jumping around species¹.


__________
You didn't think humans were the only ones suffering from interspecies disease.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I’m no economist, but I can’t believe poor buying essential items will cause huge inflation for all of us… or put it in other words, our inflation is in check currently because thankfully there are hungry people in the world?

Anyway, American conservatives are probably most against robbing the rich to feed lazy bums. However, if none are being robbed and it’s paid out to everyone, they seemed to be okay with that in Alaska.

There will definitely be inflation anyways, but rich will also get richer… hopefully we can keep the wealth gap in checked better that way.

After thinking a bit more, in a less healthy society, if medium income is at or below poverty level, then UBI probably won’t work very well… that could seriously drive up inflation in that place if all of a sudden half of the population gained additional purchase power just like that… but I don’t think US or AU would have that problem.

[Yw-slayer]

What if it is a Jesus fish?

Bro. His response was "Jesus fish feed many people soentbibg something god miracle freedom rights tax winking smilie".

Amirite?

[Crazed_Insanity]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/earth-democrats-white-women-voters-210500719.html

I think I agree with the above opinion piece regarding that governor's race...

I suspect McAuliffe was just caught off guard by the CRT boogyman GOP has created and responded poorly in his debate. Similar to the comment made by Hillary about the deplorables...

Both Hillary and McAuliffe should have won IMHO. Proper messaging is important... at least try to be more "politically correct" with those less educated conservative white voters and avoid sounding too condescending and I think dems should win easily.

Look, I could be wrong about that, but whatever the cause for DNC loses, we gotta try to figure it out and try different things and not make the same mistakes again and again by acting confused. We cannot afford to let boogymen win again and again in the future...

[neanderthal]

Anyway, I just think the 'wave' that pussy grabber rode into town on was also amplified by the left. If we double down on this 'confusion', more and more trump-like candidates will win.

Root cause of that anti-establishment sentiment was of course due to the Establishment fucking around with us too much. However, American people now are just too busy fight with each other to care what the establishment is up to.

YOU are the "left" that was amplifying the wave the former guy rode in on. You're still doing it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

You could blame me for not voting Hillary, but I don’t think I personally energized the trump base.

You may accuse only progressives are into cancel culture, not centrist Democrats, but even Bernie thinks cancel culture is out of control.

Anyway, I really think Dems need to come up with better strategies/responses to all the boogeymen GOP brings up. Yes, tea party, Trump and Q/CRT are all retarded, but try not to see their base as deplorable retards, but as fellow Americans(who are being duped…) I really think most races should be an easy win for the dems. There’s no way there are that many white supremacists in the US!

Lastly we need to be fair and treat everyone equally, including rich white males. Seek true justice, not revenge!

[Dicknose]

From an aussie newspaper this week
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-02/the-millionaires-who-want-to-pay-more-tax/100586728

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I think all capitalistic society will have this wealth gap problem. That inevitability will most likely need to be balanced by some socialism... As article stated, not only the rich will naturally accumulate wealth faster, the fact that they have more influence on the politicians who decided on taxes also won't help matters either...

Something like that millionaires for humanity sounds pretty awesome. Nice to know there are more and more rich folks who are still thinking about the rest of humanity instead of acting as cancerous cells sucking up money. It's really for the benefit of the rich to help the poor survive. Being cancerous, you'd just end up killing everybody sooner, including yourself.

Anyway, to really reform tax laws or the government itself, I think it'll probably take more 'millionaires for humanity' in order to financially influence our politicians? As long as we have an 'establishment' who's in control of our politicians wish to continue to save their money, things probably won't ever change until social justice warriors overthrow that corrupt government. Well, it's going to have to be a bi-partisan social justice warrior... for now the establishment has little to worry about because these warriors will have to fight and kill each other from across the political divide 1st.

[Rare White Ape]

I wonder how good the chances are of JFK Jr being elected as Vice President on a ticket with Trump in ‘24.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Should be very high in the alternative parallel universe/reality… we’ll just have to wait and see exactly which reality we’re really living in…

Q can make anything happen in a snap!

[Rare White Ape]

This is a post-reality reality.

[Yw-slayer]

I wonder how good the chances are of JFK Jr being elected as Vice President on a ticket with Trump in ‘24.

Will be an incredible achievement by Billi's favourite country and political system.

[neanderthal]

Hey billi.

How is the "do something" coalition handling the news of, <checks notes> ... progress? And by that I mean the passage of the bill that your "squad" voted against.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not sure what to think. I do hope Biden will somehow improve all our lives cause otherwise republicans will be back in charge again… hopefully not trump.

Made some new friends on FB in the RV travel trailer community… heard someone said they’d rather have mean tweets and cheap gas rather than high gas prices now.

I know presidents don’t have full control of gas prices, but things are not trending well for Biden…

Let’s go Biden! Make American lives better and don’t let them be duped by boogie men!

On a personal level, I’m actually giving Biden thumbs up for now. I really did not believe he’d pull out of Afghanistan! That alone for sure would save us lots of tax money!

I also admired him for wanting to lift vaccines patents, although it’s not quite working out yet, but at least we know where he stands on that?

I trust him more now after the failed min wage increase. I do believe he is probably more ‘progressive’ than Hillary Hillary and Obama!

[neanderthal]

"I'm symbolically voting against a significnt leap in progress because I believe that nothing at all is better than a lot of somethings if I didn't get everything *I* wanted" is hell of a stance. A summation of what your favorites said.

Right up there with "my principles require me to vote 3rd party, and also require me to make demands of the party i voted against and to demand all those are met immediately."

[Crazed_Insanity]

If that’s what they believe, what’s it to us? Also, did they get their way? Why are you so angry about that?

They are not allowed to believe what they want to believe?

[Tom Servo]

Very good and very long in depth article on the before, during, and after of January 6th. https://wapo.st/3n00BUl

[Crazed_Insanity]

Wow, that’s super in depth (too long, didn’t finish)! Any new revelations that could result in locking him up for good?

[neanderthal]

If that’s what they believe, what’s it to us? Also, did they get their way? Why are you so angry about that?

They are not allowed to believe what they want to believe?

I'm not angry, i'm calling out their bullshit, just like i'm constantly calling out yours. You call yourself progressive then vote against one of the most progressive pieces of legislature ever written? Yeah, unicorn shit!!!

[Tom Servo]

FWIW, I am angry. The fact that people will vote for a wannabe fascist dictator that literally tried to stage a violent coup to retain power because they remember one point in four years while he was in power where gas was cheaper makes me angry.

I'm of the opinion that you can believe what you want, but when your beliefs actively threaten the democracy that I rather like, then I'll get angry.

[Tom Servo]

Wow, that’s super in depth (too long, didn’t finish)! Any new revelations that could result in locking him up for good?

Nothing we didn't already know. That he is very good at whipping up his fans into a frenzy while picking the right words to have plausible deniability. That he continued to cajole Pence even as Pence was being ushered into a secure location. That he continues to push a lie that the election was stolen.

There are a lot of things in there I didn't know, but nothing that sheds new light specifically on Trump. A lot of it was the FBI dropping the ball as threats became more specific and targeted.

I think the biggest thing that stood out to me was about the national guard. There was a lot of grousing that it took forever to get the national guard involved on Jan. 6th. According to the article, there were two reasons for that - that the optics looked bad, especially given the overreaction to the George Floyd protests and they didn't want to repeat that, but also that the national guard would likely have to respond to orders from the president, and the last thing they wanted was the (to me, very real) possibility that he might order them to turn on the capitol police.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think it’s quite understandable to be angry at my progressive friends and my trumpian friends…, but I also understand where they’re coming from.

I was really upset at Biden during that failed attempt at raising min wage too, but later on I can see that he tried… he also surpassed my expectations by pulling out of that forever war… and the child credit thing, although not permanent and not for everyone but it’s probably the closest thing to UBI. So although Biden has super low approval rating now, I’m actually more willing to give him more of my support. Other progressives will continue to want whatever they want, I just hope Biden will continue to improve the lives of all Americans during these hard times so that dems can retain control…

As for trump, he also obviously has a lot of support…, and his supporters have lots of guns. I don’t know what FBI and capitol police were thinking, but I was really expecting a real insurrection possibility turning trump into a dictator! However, it’s clear that didn’t happen. Bloodshed was kept to a minimum and trump did tell those people to go home and they did. The entire event was weird and rather surreal, but bottom line is that I wouldn’t call that a real insurrection. Those people was just an angry mob… duped.

Fellow Americans will have differences in opinions and beliefs. Whether progressives or conservatives, I do believe they still love this nation called the USA. Just hope we can soon live up to our nation’s name…

[neanderthal]

You don't give a fuck about minimum wage while you're busy coddling billionaires and agitating for a flat tax. Flat taxes are regressive and hit/ hurt the poor, like those on minimum wage, much more than the wealthy.

You don't get to both sides it.

You, continually, don't understand the issues, and continually play devils advocate trying to act smart and contrarian, but showing your entire arse instead. Continually.

[Tom Servo]

I know I'll regret asking this, but by what measure do you consider Jan. 6th to not be an insurrection and that "bloodshed was kept to a minimum"? A lot more people died than normally do during our presidential transitions, and a bunch of people smashed their way into the capitol attempting to stop the peaceful transfer of power that we basically take for granted at this point. What would be your normal minimum level of bloodshed, and what would have had to happen for this to be an insurrection?

[neanderthal]

I know I'll regret asking this, but by what measure do you consider Jan. 6th to not be an insurrection and that "bloodshed was kept to a minimum"? A lot more people died than normally do during our presidential transitions, and a bunch of people smashed their way into the capitol attempting to stop the peaceful transfer of power that we basically take for granted at this point. What would be your normal minimum level of bloodshed, and what would have had to happen for this to be an insurrection?

Same number of people died during Benghazi, but suddenly it's not/ wasn't a big deal.

I could swear billi was one of the people criticising HIllary for being Madame Secretary when that happened. Echoing and parroting right wing media.

And now it's just a ... misunderstanding. billis mental gymnastics trying to both sides this one are as obvious as every other time.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I know I'll regret asking this, but by what measure do you consider Jan. 6th to not be an insurrection and that "bloodshed was kept to a minimum"? A lot more people died than normally do during our presidential transitions, and a bunch of people smashed their way into the capitol attempting to stop the peaceful transfer of power that we basically take for granted at this point. What would be your normal minimum level of bloodshed, and what would have had to happen for this to be an insurrection?

What happened definitely was not good. However, I honestly thought a bunch of angry deplorables with lots of guns would cause a lot more damage than that! I’m just grateful that things didn’t get too out of control… I hope you understand that I’m not trying to defend trump or any of what had happened.

I really kinda wish media could stop regurgitate these type of news over and over again without any new revelations or resolutions…

Reveal to us more info, more evidence so that we can actually lock him up, or lock her up? If we don’t have enough to put anybody away yet, maybe we ought to not cycle it in the news over and over again just to stir up people’s emotions?

I guess similarly for insurrections or impeachment’s? If I’m going to start an impeachment or insurrection, I want to be sure that I have a reasonable chance of success before actually going thru with it. I’d not want to try any of that and fail… if I know there’s a good chance that I won’t succeed, I’d not even bother to try.

Whether if we’re talking about impeachment or insurrection, both attempts were pretty lame IMHO. Looks like they’re just putting up shows or something. The conspiracy theorist in me is telling me somebody is manipulating people to put up these ‘shows’ so that it maximizes the hatred between the left and the right so that we’re distracted from knowing ‘his’ real motive… and whoever that is, he is doing a fine job at manipulating us.

[Tom Servo]

Risking the chance I'm putting words into your mouth, I'll take it as you mean "it could have been much worse", not that "bloodshed was kept to a minimum." A minimum would have been no bloodshed, like normal. I'd argue we missed minimum by a wide margin, but I also agree it could have been much worse.

I would be hesitant to base newsworthiness on "locking someone up." There's something to be said about investigations to try to find nuances and truths that we didn't know before, even if it doesn't result in the ultimate end. I'd also be hesitant to argue against regurgitating the same thing over and over again without any new revelations or resolutions, it's been a couple of millennia and that whole bible story hasn't really changed all that much.

[Crazed_Insanity]

You’re good. You’ve put better words in my mouth! I should’ve said those words to begin with so that you won’t get all mad at me! :p

Anyway, it just felt like both sides are just trying to ‘cancel’ the other side’s candidate… whether it’s Hillary or trump…, but neither side could come up with anything substantial to really put them away for good.

Do you actually have the email that could lock Hillary up? No? Then can you please just shut up already?

Similarly, do you have anything that can put trump away so that it’ll at least stop him from coming back in 2024?

Gospel story at least isn’t trying to bad mouth anybody nor is it being reported on the news again and again… :p that message of good news definitely won’t change for a while. However, bad/unsubstantiated news really should be kept at a minimum.

[Crazed_Insanity]

You don't give a fuck about minimum wage while you're busy coddling billionaires and agitating for a flat tax. Flat taxes are regressive and hit/ hurt the poor, like those on minimum wage, much more than the wealthy.

You don't get to both sides it.

You, continually, don't understand the issues, and continually play devils advocate trying to act smart and contrarian, but showing your entire arse instead. Continually.

I've never claimed to be very smart, maybe just slightly above average to be able to get by thru life? ;) I think DN is probably one of smartest around here?

Anyway, I probably only appear to be 'contrarian' because I do both side the issues a lot. Like I've always proudly claiming to be both pro-life and pro-choice... so whether if we're talking about babies or vaccines, I don't have to switch sides! I will just do whatever it takes to maximize both lives and our ability to choose(wisely)! :)

There's a reason why we have both capitalism AND socialism, conservatives AND liberals.

Similar to people's personality I suppose, we have both extroverts and introverts. Each of us may have a preference and therefore picks a side, but it doesn't make people on the other side inferior or anything.

Plus, it's becoming clearer scientifically that our political orientation is due to our genes. If we can accept and embrace people with different sexual orientation, we should be able to accept and embrace people with different political orientation... and not see people with different political orientation as 'wrong'.

Of course we need to fight crap like conspiracies, and the 1st step is to have government build up trust with its people. Let's ignore the fact that our government often times are not that transparent, but when it consistently ignores the needs of its average citizens and only cater to the rich and powerful, what do you expect?

Lastly, regardless of whether Billi is right or wrong, I don't think I alone have the power to change anything either way. You do what you think is right and I'll do what I think its right. At least we're not living under a nutcase authoritarian. "They" actually had a great opportunity to install Trump as dictator back in January, but one reason or another, it didn't happen. Trump also actually told people to go home.

If I were Xi Jinping, I'd encourage those mob to kill all who opposed me on Capitol Hill and just take the opportunity to grab power... and then just pretend the mob represents the american people's will. If I really want to hold on to power, I'd not tell them to go home. Anyway, what happened there in Jan was really really weird. I'm definitely not smart enough to figure out what really happened.

[Dicknose]

What would be your normal minimum level of bloodshed

Classic.

Ill also point out that this made the US look really bad/stupid at the international level. The country that is held up as the leading democracy was shown to be a long way from ideal.

[dodint]

While true; you (in the royal sense) have said that about everything that has ever been covered in any news cycle.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Classic.

Ill also point out that this made the US look really bad/stupid at the international level. The country that is held up as the leading democracy was shown to be a long way from ideal.

Yeah, I really don't think it's necessary to point out the obvious. :p Even before Trump, US has became bad and stupid at the international level... or else people wouldn't be flying airplanes into our buildings.

Truth be told, US's super power status was never gained by being collectively smart. Also, let's be fair, it's not like our government has been super faithful to its constitution and this is what we have to show for. Cancerous corruption is now pretty rampant and somehow we're still leading the world... at least in vaccine development?

Democracy obviously has draw backs but what is really the most ideal form of government in this real world? If you're the king of the world, how will you run your government? I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with US constitution, we just need to trim corruption within our government somehow in order to have it truly represent the people, rather than rich corporations... and that's not an easy task. I really think it's unfair to blame the American people and democracy. American people on both sides have been long neglected by both parties. What happened may be stupid, but totally reasonable IMHO.

I think those conservative mobs probably still love this country... that's why they didn't just torch the place down while they had the chance. I really think that if they really wanted an insurrection, there should've been a LOT more bloodshed...

Anyway, point is, please don't blame the people and democracy..., US government has only itself to blame.

[Rare White Ape]

Hmm yes ok cough hmmm

Slavery doesn’t exist in 2022 ok!

Specially not in Australia… ok?

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/05/you-may-bring-shame-to-your-family-australia-launches-campaign-to-stop-seasonal-farm-workers-absconding?fbclid=IwAR0IXqTzw9WnuRLKtNlagWZIla20DR o64miJ48lkuHHmVeMHB1WkK0In_QI

[Dicknose]

Hmm yes ok cough hmmm

Slavery doesn’t exist in 2022 ok!

Specially not in Australia… ok?

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/05/you-may-bring-shame-to-your-family-australia-launches-campaign-to-stop-seasonal-farm-workers-absconding?fbclid=IwAR0IXqTzw9WnuRLKtNlagWZIla20DR o64miJ48lkuHHmVeMHB1WkK0In_QI

There was a win last week when they won a min wage on a picking rate. Normally they are paid by the amount they pick, but this sets a min so they can't be exploited.
I have a feeling this might be a govt push back.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2021-11-04/fair-work-rules-every-farm-worker-entitled-minimum-rate-of-pay/100592806

These are jobs that people here dont want to do. Its hard work, but also its in remote locations, so you need to live on the farm and the farmers will deduct housing from your pay. So its not attractive to unemployed people who already have a place to live as they will effectively be paying two rents.

The farmers know that most workers are not citizens, they are backpackers and seasonal work visa. Many abuse this and underpay or overcharge living costs and these people dont feel they can complain or they will be kicked out of the country. While I wouldn't compare it to traditional slavery, it is pretty bad as things go, definitely some of the worst for our society (some sex slavery/trafficing occurs here, its much worse as the victims are often locked up when not working). There have been a number of sexual abuse claims.

On the other hand, farmers complain they can't get pickers (esp the last year due to covid) and crops are lost. Funny how "free market" is often thrown around but ignored when clearly the pay and conditions are not enough to attract people.

Clearly there are problems with the system.

[Rare White Ape]

Pay me $60k a year with good benefits and I'll pick the prickles off a cow's arse.

Producers shouldn't complain if Australians aren't travelling hours out to farms to pick strawberries for a few weeks and only getting a few thousand to do it. What do they expect?

They need to be realistic about it, just as we need to be realistic about the flow-on increase in food prices if they need to pay more in wages.

[Yw-slayer]

Page 2047, Billi and his Bros will burst into tears and light some candles for Amnesty or whatever rubbish crap.

[Crazed_Insanity]

correction, you are on p.2048 now fool.

[MR2 Fan]

ignore all of this :p

[Dicknose]

$8 hour x 8 hours = $64
$5 Gallon x 14 Miles = $70

$5 Gallon * 14 Miles / 20 mpg = $4.80

Unless their vehicle gets 1 mile to the gallon.

[MR2 Fan]

$5 Gallon * 14 Miles / 20 mpg = $4.80

Unless their vehicle gets 1 mile to the gallon.

oops....I should get some sleep :lol:

[Crazed_Insanity]

Thanks DN for MATH(Making Americans Think Harder)! :p

[Rare White Ape]

oops....I should get some sleep :lol:

Sleep just a little bit at a time.

[MR2 Fan]

Since I work a split shift at work, that's literally what I do every day. I wake up at 9:30 AM, drive to the office, work til 4PM, drive home, get home at 5PM, take a nap, work from home from 10PM-1AM...sleep, wake up, repeat :|

Hopefully it won't be for too much longer

[21Kid]

Can we create a Billi version of this thread, so people can argue with him there instead?

It's gotten rather annoying that this is what the majority of this thread has become.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes, I'd 2nd that. I need my own thread please. Listen to the kid. He knows what he's talking about. Without me, you guys should be able to read more of his political posts.

[neanderthal]

Hilary Clinton called Tulsi trash and Billi rushed to Tulsi's defense.

Tulsi herself just announced that she is in fact, trash. (https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1458792879871213569?t=LogmP_UyPixqBhBcRjlqNw&s=19)

[Crazed_Insanity]

I cannot accept that as evidence dude. That's just your opinion. I don't think what she said is that trashy considering what had happened.


The following is based on court testimony, drone footage and videos from Aug. 25, 2020:

* During the day, Rittenhouse helps clean graffiti off a school. That same day Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, is released from a Milwaukee hospital where he had been admitted after a suicide attempt.

* Around 10 p.m. video shows Rittenhouse with a rifle standing with other armed men near a used-car dealership. Rittenhouse testified he was asked to help guard the business due to the threat of looting and arson. He brought a medical kit and says his objective was to provide aid to anyone injured.

* Around 10:45 p.m., another video shows Rittenhouse asking police officers for water. One officer says: "We appreciate you guys. We really do."

* Around 11:45 p.m. Rosenbaum chases Rittenhouse into a used-car lot as Rittenhouse yells "Friendly, friendly, friendly." Rosenbaum throws a plastic bag containing toiletries at Rittenhouse.

* Rittenhouse testified that Rosenbaum grabbed his gun. A journalist for the Daily Caller, a conservative website, testified that Rosenbaum lunged for the rifle. Rittenhouse fires his gun at Rosenbaum, hitting him four times and killing him.

* Video shows Rittenhouse fleeing the scene of the Rosenbaum shooting and being chased by a growing crowd, some yelling "Get him!"

* Just minutes later, after stumbling to the ground, Rittenhouse fatally shoots Anthony Huber, a 26-year-old who swung a skateboard at him.

* After Huber was shot, Gaige Grosskreutz, now 27, stops moving toward Rittenhouse and put his hands in the air. He was holding a handgun. When Grosskreutz resumes advancing, Rittenhouse shoots him, severing most of his bicep. Rittenhouse testified that Grosskreutz had his pistol pointed at his head.

* Rittenhouse then walks toward the police with his hands up and the rifle slung across his body. Police order him to get out of the way and one officer pepper sprays Rittenhouse when he approaches the window of the patrol car. The police then drive off, believing the active shooter was elsewhere.

* Around 1:30 a.m. on Aug. 26, Rittenhouse, accompanied by his mother, turns himself into a police station in his hometown of Antioch, Illinois.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-kyle-rittenhouse-went-cleaning-graffiti-shooting-3-people-2021-11-11/

The situation was messed up. Police were assholes and rioters were assholes. I don't envy the job of that judge and jury in attempt to deliver justice in such crazy situations. One way or another, one side is going to get pissed off.

[MR2 Fan]

Can we create a Billi version of this thread, so people can argue with him there instead?

It's gotten rather annoying that this is what the majority of this thread has become.

I think I tried that once before, or maybe it was a non-Billi religion thread, can't remember

[Crazed_Insanity]

I vaguely remembered too..., but that was a completely pointless thread, right?

Like who here really wants to talk about religion? Ban Billi out of that thread, it'll just drop like a brick! :p

[neanderthal]

I cannot accept that as evidence dude. That's just your opinion. I don't think what she said is that trashy considering what had happened.



The situation was messed up. Police were assholes and rioters were assholes. I don't envy the job of that judge and jury in attempt to deliver justice in such crazy situations. One way or another, one side is going to get pissed off.

billi is the type of person who would go to a lynching and say "i'm pretty sure he did something evil. No way he was innocent."

[Crazed_Insanity]

Not saying that I know he’s innocent. I wasn’t there. However, don’t tell me there weren’t looting and rioting going on. Just because cops are corrupt and racist, it doesn’t give black people the right to cause problems. That’s not what BLM is about.

Is that kid really just trying to guard and protect property or is he really a racist and looking for a chance to kill some black guys out in the middle of the night looking for trouble?

Is it really that black and white to you? It’s always the white peoples fault?

Hillary is also entitled to her opinion and likewise Tulsi is entitled to her opinion. I just agree more with Tulsi than Hillary. If you wish to label people who disagree with you as trash, that’s fine, but I just don’t agree with you. I’m just glad people like you and Hillary are not in power because people like me and Tulsi will probably be tossed into the landfills.

That’s what happens in China you know. If Xi doesn’t like you, you’d disappear like a piece of trash.

[2ndMoparMan]

Bannon going to jail.

[neanderthal]

Not saying that I know he’s innocent. I wasn’t there. However, don’t tell me there weren’t looting and rioting going on. Just because cops are corrupt and racist, it doesn’t give black people the right to cause problems. That’s not what BLM is about.

Is that kid really just trying to guard and protect property or is he really a racist and looking for a chance to kill some black guys out in the middle of the night looking for trouble?

Is it really that black and white to you? It’s always the white peoples fault?

Hillary is also entitled to her opinion and likewise Tulsi is entitled to her opinion. I just agree more with Tulsi than Hillary. If you wish to label people who disagree with you as trash, that’s fine, but I just don’t agree with you. I’m just glad people like you and Hillary are not in power because people like me and Tulsi will probably be tossed into the landfills.

That’s what happens in China you know. If Xi doesn’t like you, you’d disappear like a piece of trash.

:lol:

Just like I fucking said. And throw in a little casual racism in the next sentence too.

If you can't parse the difference between protesting, violently or not, for justice, and just protesting for the sake of being a hooligan, then you're a fucking idiot! And you, billi, are the grand marshal of fucking idiots.
You don't even know what John Lewis meant when he said you need to make good trouble, i bet.

[neanderthal]

Bannon going to jail.

It'll be way too long before we see that.
Not only, most people don't even understand that the evidence against him has to pass muster with the grand jury that is convened. Looking at the shenanigans with the 2 big trials going on right now I don't have any faith in the justice system, and more importantly, in the juries that are convened.

[Crazed_Insanity]

:lol:

Just like I fucking said. And throw in a little casual racism in the next sentence too.

If you can't parse the difference between protesting, violently or not, for justice, and just protesting for the sake of being a hooligan, then you're a fucking idiot! And you, billi, are the grand marshal of fucking idiots.
You don't even know what John Lewis meant when he said you need to make good trouble, i bet.

I can bet he would not consider rioting in the middle of the night as good trouble. If John really meant it as you do, then I just can’t agree with that. I would not mind remain as a piece of idiotic trash than to follow that kind of “ideology”.

You can rest assure BLM will lose steam if you get your way.

[Tom Servo]

It'll be way too long before we see that.
Not only, most people don't even understand that the evidence against him has to pass muster with the grand jury that is convened. Looking at the shenanigans with the 2 big trials going on right now I don't have any faith in the justice system, and more importantly, in the juries that are convened.

Wait, I thought he was indicted, which means the grand jury already passed said muster?

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think he’s saying formally charged doesn’t mean much, doesn’t really mean he’s going to jail. Just as being impeached twice doesn’t mean much… in a way I kinda agree with him there. Let’s see if they’ll actually lock’em up!

[Rare White Ape]

Are we having a debate on the merits of a known bootlicker and cop apologist going to a riot about police brutality intending to be a medic and protect property dressed in olive green and carrying a magical wellness AR15 that shoots magical healing bullets and talking in court about having to defend himself from rioters because he killed two people and then ran to the cops for protection?

[MR2 Fan]

Supposedly Bannon is turning himself in on Monday.....OR he's going to fly out to some country that doesn't have extradition....one of the two

[Crazed_Insanity]

Are we having a debate on the merits of a known bootlicker and cop apologist going to a riot about police brutality intending to be a medic and protect property dressed in olive green and carrying a magical wellness AR15 that shoots magical healing bullets and talking in court about having to defend himself from rioters because he killed two people and then ran to the cops for protection?

Wasn’t really about him but about Tulsa’s opinion of him.

That stupid kid should’ve stayed home and likewise those rioters. No matter the outcome, that trial can only end badly.

[Yw-slayer]

Incredible achievement by Billi's favourite government and political system, congratulations!!!!

[Crazed_Insanity]

US political system has some major issues to work out, but at least we still have the freedom to be able to work it out. Whereas you have to obey Xi for as long as he shall live. I could be wrong, maybe he will go down in history as the best dictator ever? We’ll see.

[Rare White Ape]

No matter the outcome, that trial can only end badly.

What if he was given 40 years in prison?

[Crazed_Insanity]

If he is indeed a white supremacist taking the opportunity to kill black people, then he can be lynched for 400 years. But what if he’s really just a stupid kid like Tulsi said?

Neanderthal seemed pretty certain that can’t possibly be true. Only trashy people would think like Tulsi…

All I’m saying is that based on court testimony, tulsi wasn’t talking trash.

Btw, a guilty verdict will also only increase the hatred of more white people to hate black people. A not guilty verdict of course will confirm systemic racism. Giving more justification for more riots. It’s a no win case.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Holy shit! I haven’t really been paying close attention to that trial until recently… I’ve always assumed the kid shot black people, but I just realized the 3 people he killed/injured were all white!

So at least this was not about race?