Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2015, 02:58 PM   #521 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

i understood it just fine. can you try answering my question in your own words? you're making this pretty boring tbh.
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 03:03 PM   #522 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth View Post
i understood it just fine. can you try answering my question in your own words? you're making this pretty boring tbh.
I'd say pretty much the same as what I quoted, just not as succinctly.

Working father runs out on his wife and three young children. There's simply no way for her to earn enough money to cover all of her expenses and still take care of her kids.

As a society what should we do?
Chula Vista is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 03:20 PM   #523 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
So money never belongs to the person who "worked for it"? It's entirely communal? What about property? Where does ownership come into play?
This is a logical fallacy of the strawman variety. How do you go from paying a percentage of income to tax to : "So money never belongs to the person who "worked for it"? It's entirely communal?"?

edit :

To JWB, a simplified answer is society's losers are a burden on all of us. Just to illustrate a point - let's say you have a poor person. Scenario A, this person gets welfare taking him our her out of poverty. This costs society some, but hopefully, the welfare will enable this person to become a contributing member of society who pays back in taxes what society spent. But maybe not, it's a gamble. Scenario B, the person is in poverty and receives no help. This person likely has reduced quality of life, has a greater chance of becoming sick, of becoming a criminal, is less likely to become well educated, is more probable to engage in substance abuse etc. That person will also tax society. In money - possibly, particularly if he or she enters the criminal system, but there are other ways of taxing society too.

I think scenario A is generally the best option for a good society.
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.

Last edited by tore; 04-16-2015 at 03:45 PM.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 03:56 PM   #524 (permalink)
subscribe to pewdiepie
 
Dharma & Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 36,723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tore View Post
This is a logical fallacy of the strawman variety. How do you go from paying a percentage of income to tax to : "So money never belongs to the person who "worked for it"? It's entirely communal?"?
Well, A.) I'm just ****ing around playing the Devil's Advocate in general. If someone had taken a conservative position about my first post, I would have gone the other way.

And B.) if the government can take your money, then did you ever really own it? There has to be a minimal level of government coercion concerning your income, to provide for infrastructure, education, etc, but no matter how you dress it up, it's still coercion with the power of armed force behind it. Which kind of implies that all money is communal to start with.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvin & Hobbes
To evaluate my character my immediate pleasure is being pitted against my future greed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Pepe Kalle View Post
The Batlord is amazing man. He loves some fine woman and he gets horny easily. What is better than that.
Dharma & Greg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 04:48 PM   #525 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
I'd say pretty much the same as what I quoted, just not as succinctly.

Working father runs out on his wife and three young children. There's simply no way for her to earn enough money to cover all of her expenses and still take care of her kids.

As a society what should we do?
so you won't answer my question but you'd like me to answer yours?
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 05:03 PM   #526 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth View Post
do you think paying poor people to be poor might remove some of the incentive not to be poor?
We don't pay poor people to be poor. We support poor people so they can get by and hopefully better support themselves and society as a whole, and maybe even crawl out of the holes they are in.

It's unfortunate that so may people scam the system though.
Chula Vista is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 07:01 PM   #527 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth View Post
.
What are your thoughts on the government paying farmers not to grow crops?
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 07:11 PM   #528 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
We don't pay poor people to be poor. We support poor people so they can get by and hopefully better support themselves and society as a whole, and maybe even crawl out of the holes they are in.

It's unfortunate that so may people scam the system though.
you really do think that rewording things can make them better, don't you?
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 07:11 PM   #529 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
What are your thoughts on the government paying farmers not to grow crops?
what do you mean?
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2015, 07:20 PM   #530 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,251
Default

The government pays farmers to not grow crops on some of their land.

If you're interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricul...Adjustment_Act

I think this issue parallels the "supporting poor people" issue in function, so I was curious if you felt the same way about it.
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...

Last edited by DwnWthVwls; 04-16-2015 at 07:26 PM.
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.