just another rant!?

[Grim Bongmaster]

hmm...ever have deja vu?

[BillyBritPop]

I'm having deja vu right now. Like I was reincarnated into some other grasscity member who keeps having the same posts.

Very strange.

He's the deal with taxes, maybe my final word. Fuck man, they are inevitable! Death and taxes!

The problem is how they're spent, not how much they take. Perhaps a person should be able to allocate his taxes to an area he deems worthy? One person may chose the arts, the other can chose the military, one can choose the poor, the other can choose the military.

[Grim Bongmaster]

I have a quick question for ya though digit. I've seen several posts about U.S. government actions you were not happy about. You seem to think our government is intrusive towords the rights of other countries and the people that inhabit them. Considering that a socialist government, like the one you are advocating would require even more government, and considering that the size of our government is to blame for the problems you lament. Why are you advocating it? We both want the same thing, except for welfare.(from what I can tell) We would like the government to be less intrusive, respect the rights of other countries, the citizens of those countries, and it's own citizens. I simply don't believe that more bureaucracy is the answer, why do you think it is?

[Gilligan]

You are right, i think both sides want the same things, just different vehicles to get there. It does seem odd though that people hate government, but want to make it even bigger. Can someone explain that to me as well?

[oiseau777]

I know you all think I'm the biggest liberal out there, but I'm not. Anyway, I love the government and I hate it. Yep. I want the government to provide police, firemen, ambulances, etc. Pave roads, plow roads, pick up the trash, provide me with water, sewers, and help the helpless. But then again I don't like to pay for this because I think the police do a shitty job. The selective enforcement is a bunch of shit!

I ran a red light right in front of a cop the other day and he pulled me over. I said to him, "WTF! What about all those double-parked cars? Look at that car, it's parked in a cross walk." But he gave me a ticket and ignored the others. Fuck that! If I knew the cop was giving tickets to everyone I would be happier!

Like over here at the grocery store. The government decided that making a left turn was dangerous. The put up three signs - two no left turn signs and one all traffic this way sign. Everyday, I see car after car breaking the law there! The cops know they are breaking the law, but they don't care!

And that is why I hate the government and don't want to pay my taxes.

[Grim Bongmaster]

All of those problems stem from too much government, why do you want more!?!? Liberals want more FEDERAL government. When all the things you just listed would be more efficiently handled on a local level. The ticket bullshit is why some libertarians...the extremists, want to privatize roads, this idea scares the hell out of me, but on the brights side, you wouldn't get any tickets.

Oh, and elroy, if we are all equal....how can somone be MORE equal?

[Digit]

Originally Posted by Gilligan

"but have you not considered that under such a system everyone would find a job they actually liked doing? ok sure, the majority would take longer out of work, but this would easily be made up for by the increase in productivity due to a very happy workforce. imagine it.... everyone with a job loves their job! even the most stringent ecconomist would see the silver lining in that idea. the reward for work sould be the work itself and what is achieved through that work, the motive to work sould be to feel passionately about your work, not because you simply need to do it to survive. being coerced through fear into doing something you dont want to do for the most of your time seems absurd to me, especially when that fear is manufactured. doing that to people on mass surely would have a very negative effect on society that would only grow and worsen with time."

Using this logic, who would become janitors? Who would work at Burger King and cook fries? I dont know too many people who like working there.

why do we need to have people do those jobs at all then!? give the janitor $100,000 and he'll design floors than mop themselves when no one is around, or whatever else he might achieve if he didnt have to go to work every day as a janitor.
btw, i know a few peeps who like being janitors. i probably know a few who wouldnt mind but do something else because it pays the bills.
hmm, now why do we need people flipping burgers at all i don't know. the tech for that could be implemented today, and it would cost these fast food chain giants far less than the $1.50 slave wages they hand out to teens desperate to get some money so they can get their fix of government approved drugs. but, i dont wanna go around telling the corporations how to make loads more money no matter how many ideas i have on how they could improve their profit margins and increase sales of their food substitute. not until they improve the rest of their business practices.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

The reason pure Socialsim cant/wont work is because the number of benificiaries will outnumber the contributers. When people see they dont have to do as much work without fear of being poor/hungry/homeless, more people will stop working.

oh yes, i forgot, we cant have that..... people not being scared into "work".

fucking slavery i say.


wanna explain to me what "pure" socialism is?

Originally Posted by Gilligan

The appeal of socialism make it popular. It does sound like a nice idea. But it simply will not work. This idea of everyone living in harmony and everyone loving their job and benifiting from their neighbor's work simply wont work. My guess would be there would be a rise in the number of career musicians/actors/writers, which would further take away from corporate jobs and low paying/high workload jobs. Who would lay bricks when they find an easier job?

you mean the type of "service" or tertiary industry jobs that we are currently artificially creating to hide the loss of primary and manufacturing industrys? oh dear, big loss. fake jobs gone. more musicians and writers to improve the quality and selection of our media/arts/entertainment. sounds horrible.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

And do you want to talk about power curupting? The governemt will have ALL the power, which is why most socialist societies drift into facism. Socialism gives ALL the power to a few.

yes, i agree this has been the flaw in all previous attempts. one twatt gets the idea "i know best" and fucks the whole thing up. socialism crumbles, slips right past communism and into a fascist dicatorship. true. and why does this happen? because socialism is an ideology, one that cannot work without it being created and maintained by the majority, by the people.... ie, LIBERTARIAN.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

I think you're arguing against communism now.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

Funny thing about guns, more people get killed in car wrecks, fires, overdose from drugs and/or alcohol, but guns get all the attention.

yep, so true. why not get everyone aware to the dangers of all the things that are statistically more likely to kill you. like family.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

More people die from falls each year. I also do not think i should be punished because you live in an area where you fear for your life because someone could have a gun. Banning guns does not take them away from the criminals, who do not buy their guns legally. Banning would only increase the black market, which would create more violence just as the drug black market has, and criminals will still have thier guns.

Yep, as much as i kinda really hate the existance of guns... prohibition does not work. regulation does.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

All the people who are in favor of gun control,

oh, wait there.... we're not making the silly mistake of asuming the opposite are we? i mean, i think there damn well should be control on guns. either extreme of all out banning or free for allleads to the same problem... too many unknown guns in dangerous hands.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

think about this next time you sit down to eat your hamburger. That used to be a living cow. He lived in a tiny field his entire life, he was shot up with steriods, and was slaughtered by someone so you could eat it.

yeah, i grew up on a beef cattle farm, so i know all about it.... except... we tended not to fill ours with steroids as its only gonna go through the food chain. really fucked up.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

Someone who hunts has to find where the animals are, and it doesnt take just walking in the woods. They hunt, track, and kill the animal. It lived a free life. That person also drags it to his truck, cleans it, and eats it. Which is more fair????????? Hunting and killing a free animal or paying someone to pick one out of a pasture and kill it for you?

neither. its not really a fair question. either way could be more cruel. have you seen what the rich folks in the UK countryside do? ew.
but yeah, i totally get your point. i never liked the idea of fences and keeping the animals just so we could eat them later... but then the other side is.... if we we'rent, they wouldnt have a life, they wouldnt have existed at all. at least the farmer creates life (by control of the land), the honourable hunter only takes his part for his needs (and scavengers will get the rest anyways).

and of course, we have to accept that without agriculture, without the advent of farming to bring an end to the hunter/gatherer lifestyle we wouldnt have all the luvly luvly things we have today that were built upon the awakening of science and art when we no longer had to spend all our time on our own imediate survival. oh wow, wouldnt that be cool.... to be a hunter, then be told one day, hey, its ok... you don't need to spend your day on the hunt only for the mere chance of food, we have a few animals in a cage we're gonna breed for you, and we're planting seeds so we get a crop of what we want.... you have the day off. imagine the possabilities. the hunter no longer has just caught a meal for a day, his options are open, and th possabilities are endless.

but no... your right. we need to make sure peoples lives are consumed with really only one thing, the need to work to survive. no one should ever be able to just live freely.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one."

:nod: works both ways. you gotta be a little more determined to kill someone with a knife than the squeeze of a trigger for a distance. but yeah... prohibition never works.

Originally Posted by Gilligan

Edit: Maybe the guy living off 15,000$ should get an education. He should look back at his life and ask himself what he has done that he hasnt. Anyone willing to work, even with just a highschool education, can get a job making more than that. He might want to think about going to a tech school or apply at a place with job training, or transfer to a different department in his own workplace where he could learn a skill and make more money. He might even start a part time job!

Who spends the money in this country? Who goes on vacations, buys cars, boats, golf clubs, goes out to clubs, buys land? The rich. They would be paying more than the poor. The flattax would tax people based on how they live their life.

http://www.fairtax.org/ This is the current form, but i think this idea with some reformations could work very well.

[QUOTE=Gilligan]

if the basic flat rate of the standard of living was taken care of... then everyone would be rich!!!! everyone would have enough spare cash to throw around!

just from an initial glance over that fairtax..... i'd get one of your ecconomics student friends to go over it with you.... it looks bad and smells bad. i agree there are better methods of taxation, and sure that may well be better than the current methods u guys have depending on how they exactly tally it all up, but the basic principle is just completely daft from my imediate reactionary point of view.

haha, that was a fun way to kill an hour.


oops, yeah one last point on guns....
when its written into your constitution that guns are required as a protection of said constitution, shouldnt these arms be working to protect the constitution when it comes under fire? or did jefferson and chums not think that the constitution could be subverted from within?
its not the way i'd choose to improve or overthrow a government, but if guns are what you got, guns are your revolt,.~-/|\-~.
go shoot your neighbours television set. all channels i have seen in the US are almost purely bi-partisan, and ignore the others. kill the TV sets of america! go north to canada! they had better coverage of your election than you guys had yourself! kidding? u decide.

[Grim Bongmaster]

...you didn't answer my question...... and I would rather be a slave to my own needs than a slave to others.

I do agree that the coverage of the election sucked. Two presidential canidates were arrested, by trying to participate in the debates...did you guys see that in the news?!?!

[Gilligan]

yes grim, is the the socialist/liberal tactic. I just proved it beyond any doubt. You call digit out, and he responds by disecting my post. hahaha he cant answer the question, that is the whole point.

If these gun control people lived 150 years ago, they would die because they think it is so cruel to kill an animal for food. They would rather pay someone else to kill the animal who has lived ina fence its whole life. Id rather hunt and kill something than buy it at the store. The people who rather buy it, pay someone to do their dirty work. hypocrites i say!.

I dont impose my hunting on you, you are free to buy food, so dont impose your beliefs on me. Dont punish the majoirty because a few people are idiots with guns.

By having your own cow, your in the probably 1% that does. All beef in stores have been pumped full of steriods and have lived in basicly a cage walking in its own shit its whole life.

Working and not being fairly paid is slavery. That is what socialism is.

Also, try answering the question grim asked you. Thats why i bumped the topic back up, to see if you could answer it.

Edit: take a look at the socialist countries from the last 100 years. Tell me how many eventually led to facism. Almost every one. Socialism is the gate to facism. It gives way to much power to the government, and like you said, power currupts. China, Germany, Vietnam, all socialist countries within the last 100 years, all led to communism and/or facism. Id rather be dead than be red.

[Grim Bongmaster]

....I guess I'm not going to get an answer...

[oiseau777]

GRim, what's the question again? Is it "How can someone be more equal?" Well, literally, they can't. But in the eyes of the law, the world, they can. How? MONEY, MONEY, MONEY!

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Grim Bongmaster

I have a quick question for ya though digit. I've seen several posts about U.S. government actions you were not happy about. You seem to think our government is intrusive towords the rights of other countries and the people that inhabit them. Considering that a socialist government, like the one you are advocating would require even more government, and considering that the size of our government is to blame for the problems you lament. Why are you advocating it? We both want the same thing, except for welfare.(from what I can tell) We would like the government to be less intrusive, respect the rights of other countries, the citizens of those countries, and it's own citizens. I simply don't believe that more bureaucracy is the answer, why do you think it is?

I think this is the question you guys are skating around.

[Grim Bongmaster]

damn....I thought I was finally going to get an answer to that question....

[Gilligan]

Nope, i doubt anyone answers that man. Sorry. I think we both know the answer though...

[Digit]

glad to see u guys enjoying your little shits and giggles while patting each other on the back because i didnt answer a question addressed to "elroy"? that was the question you were refering to right? how can someone be more equal?

do you want the tabloid answer or the disection and analysis?

i'm guessing tabloid.

you cant.

happy with your tabloid recationary soundbite answer?

here's the leangthy version.

if it can be concieved that one could be less equal, ie there being greater inequality, then a reduction in this would ultimately lead to being more equal.
....but then... it depends on your starting point, where you pinpoint "equal". relativity, its funky shit, cuts right across the bullshit.
and you see, in what quantities are we measuring? are we attempting an all out generalisation across the whole?

Originally Posted by Grim Bongmaster

All of those problems stem from too much government, why do you want more!?!? Liberals want more FEDERAL government. When all the things you just listed would be more efficiently handled on a local level. The ticket bullshit is why some libertarians...the extremists, want to privatize roads, this idea scares the hell out of me, but on the brights side, you wouldn't get any tickets.

Oh, and elroy, if we are all equal....how can somone be MORE equal?

after reading this again i question if maybe its just the definition of government that trips us up.

you realise that without controls imposed upon money somewhere, the power vacuum will be filled by someone with the cunning to use that and exploit money to gain power... ie, a company, ie, a corporation. a corporation can still GOVERN.
anarchism could work if no one wanted more power than others, if no one measured their power against the power of others.