aeortar

Reply to Can you be an environmentalist but be a global warming skeptic? in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] There are several fallacies that one could pull from this above quote [/quote] Such as? [quote] Fear clouds our judgement [/quote] So make rational and cool-headed decisions, such as looking at how to reduce our activities that are harmful on the environment, as opposed to opposing any and all such changes because of the fear that they may be a waste of money. To put it this way, you're offered the opportunity of buying a special ticket. There's a 50% c

Reply to Damnit, Damnit, Damnit in Religion JoeUser Forums

[quote] Don't like it? Let's take an intelligence test together and see who has a brain and who does not. It isn't a conspiracy or a coincidence that highly intelligent people tend towards atheism. It's a natural progression. IQ=147 Beat it or shut up. [/quote] You failed your own test. I don't need to have a higher IQ than you to have intelligence, and the 'logic' that someone who has say an IQ of 146 can't contribute anything to t

Reply to Can you be an environmentalist but be a global warming skeptic? in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] he IPCC has stated a worldwide average temperature increase of about 2 degrees Farenheit per century (I believe the actual number is something like 1.3). At that rate, I think it's safe to say that it is hardly an immediate problem [/quote] Over a 10 year period I'd agree, it's unlikely to have a massive impact. However over a longer period of time it could well do, and while it may not hurt us massively, it could well hurt our children and their children (especially

Reply to What's with all the DLC in games these days? in Everything Else JoeUser Forums

The problem with the free DLC model is that you don't actually know for sure in advance firstly whether you will get any DLC, and if you do, what it will be. I'd wager that a significant number of sales of a game will occur early on, before any DLC has been made available. Hence providing that DLC will only likely impact on a fairly small number of sales for that game, meaning that it would then appear primarily to be to try and build some form of brand/loyalty for future games. However this

Reply to You Can "Know" in Religion JoeUser Forums

[quote] 'Which is more likely? That the bible was written by men and intentionally left ambiguous so as to give the illusion of infallibility, or a God that can't even leave clear instruction' It's not ambiguous at all really. The book is just fine [/quote] Well it wouldn't exactly score highly for clarity and being concise by most measures! The fact that there are so many different church demoninations out there which will have conflicting interpretations of the bible/it's impl

Reply to Can you be an environmentalist but be a global warming skeptic? in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] What's with all the insults hmm?...You just make statements without backing them up most of the time. [/quote] You end up having to get used to it around here I'm afraid. I groan whenever I hear someone justify a view of burying our heads in the sand re global warming based on there not being any 100% irrefutable proof of human activities having a significant impact on it. You shouldn't need proof to take action against global warming, you just need a ch

Reply to N. Korea Thumbs Nose At World, Impotent US Watches in North Korea JoeUser Forums

Such an action would have a significant chance of starting a war. The US has struggled just with Iraq+Afghanistan - the much more formidable North Koreans would be much tougher and riskier, before you even start to think of the massive casualties and instability in the region, or the chance of other countries siding with the North Koreans. It's also not like Bush has achieved any remarkable successes with them. In truth there aren't any easy options - assuming you're no

Reply to Misplaced Priorities? in US Domestic JoeUser Forums

There's been a vast amount of money spent on research into cancer - what makes you think that more money would suddenly achieve the breakthrough? Finding a cure to cancer would be an absolute goldmine for a company, so there is a clear incentive for companies to spend money on research if there is much of a prospect of success. Meanwhile you'll have various charities also with an interest, regardless of the chances of success, and hence there will be at least some research taking place. Meanw

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] if joe DONATED THE MONEY he isn't spending it...It is not semantics, it is a fundamental difference [/quote] He's spending the money on someone else. You really will argue anything, won't you! Anyway I've had enough - I've no desire to waste any more of my time trying to explain the most basic of points to someone displaying an intellect little above that of a gnat. Argue all you want about whether giving someone money is actually giving them it, or at what point the ownership

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] " Guess who was given the most money by the government as a result of their donation." The answer is neither [/quote] Then who did? Without that donation the money would be used by the government to fund something (say a new road, or a bankers job), but because of that donation the government lets Joe spend it instead. Or are you just arguing semantics, that is, either that because the government hasn't sent Joe a cheque for that amoun

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] Yet you fail to explain or refute what I wrote. [/quote] Hmm looks like it was the first one afterall... [quote] what is this fucking X, give me an EXAMPLE! you can't because it doesn't exist! [/quote] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_deduction - wow, what do you know? Tax deductions do exist! Lost the one argument so decided to try a different one? On 16th July 2008 at 14:56 and 34 seconds, Joe gave $10,076.23

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] "To take the US as an example, you have a progressive tax system with differing tax treatment of income and capital gains, and businesses are taxed on profit rather than revenue." I can see by this statement you will never be rich, I am not cutting you down I am just stating a fact. If you tax on revenue rather than profit all business will go bankrupt in three to five years. If that is the case why go into business? [/quote] I can see by this statement you are an idiot a

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] How is the government spending $.35 of every $1 spent on rich people? [/quote] If the government gives tax relief at the marginal rate to people when they spend money on a particular area (charitable donations are a common example) and you have progressive marginal rates, then a rich person gets greater relief than a poor person. So if the marginal rate for a rich person is 35% then for every $1 that person spends on the qualifying area they get to reduce their tax bill by $0.

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] That's like arguing that money given to charity is a loophole [/quote] Only if you have no greater interest in the wellbeing of your own children than some charitable cause (such as the wellbeing of someone you don't know). While I haven't seen any statistics for it, I'd be amazed if charities tended to receive a higher proportion of someones wealth from their will than their own children. Similarly I doubt much money is given to current or former employees in wills. [

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] In the first scenario, I still have $0.65. In your scenario, I have nothing [/quote] I think you might have missed one of the key assumptions for that loophole - that you WANT to give that money to someone else (such as a close family member). If you are giving that money either way, then you can either do it in a way where you get taxed fully on that money first, or do it in a way where you pay less tax and get more money as a result. Hence in the first scenario you have $0.6

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]So far most of the "loop-hole" "suggestions" would have netted brad a prison sentence for tax evasion [/quote] Legally avoiding paying tax is not tax evasion, is not illegal, and will not net you a prison sentence. Of course if you're an idiot and you try and take a loophole that works in very specific circumstances and use it in completely different circumstances then it likely will. Oh and I've little interest in providing the full details of various tax loopholes tha

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] How exactly is that a loophole? So I earn $1M and I pay/give someone else more than they should. I'm still out of the money. To use your example: I make $1M. I give my uncle $100k to mow my lawn. I save $35k in taxes but have given out $100k. I'm $65k worse off. [/quote] Look at the net effect. Lets say you want your uncle to gain $100k. If you employ your uncle then you're saving taxes at 35% while he's suffering them at a lower rate. That

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]The state values the property based on what the person actually spends money to develop. For example,my 13 acre vacant land is valued by the city for something like $500k. But if I build on it, that value goes up. What's up with that? [/quote] Let me get this straight - if someone spends money improving something (i.e. making it more valuable), it's strange that it's value should increase as a result? If the tax is to be based on property, then it is o

Reply to How to Solve Many Problems in Government in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] Term limits for Congress. [/quote] Why? If someone is great at their job, why force them to stop doing it even when everyone they represent wants them to do it? If people get worse the longer they're doing their job, then since they're elected, the voters can simply vote for someone else. There's no need for some arbitrary limit when the voters get to choose. [quote] if you are a free thinker and is looking for answers then go to youtube.com and checkout jdcrivea [/quo

Reply to The politics of panic in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] Your information is out of date. It was pushed up to 250K last year or the year before [/quote] Still worrying inadequate. If you're going to tell me my information is out of date, you should have the decency to actually check that statement before making it. I'll help you out this once though. At the time where you had banks starting to fail, what was the insurance level? Time of bank failure: ~Sept08. Time of increase in deposits to 250k: ~Oct 08 (and also only a tem

Reply to The politics of panic in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] we have the FDIC and other catches in place to ensure that the public's money isn't just lost if a bank itself goes under...that's what the FDIC is for. The FDIC insures the money that we put in banks [/quote] Last I checked there wasn't a 100% guarantee on all money deposited into the banks. [quote] Just because a bank went under somewhere else you don't draw the money out of your bank. If you're saying that this is the problem that happened, then you're just talking

Reply to Taxed To Death in Politics JoeUser Forums

So to summarise, goods(+services), income, and death are taxed?

Reply to The politics of panic in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] the system can handle it [bank collapses] if left alone [/quote] It can't by itself. Banks are about confidence. They need people (and investors) to give them money which they can then give to other people, making a profit on the difference in the interest. The moment people and investors start to feel their money isn't safe with the bank, they'll take it out. If enough people do that, you end up with a

Reply to Taxing The Rich in Politics JoeUser Forums

I'd disagree on the loopholes being an argument for increasing the tax rate. Too often loopholes (and tax avoidance) are the convenient excuse, the easy target. People think it means that rich people are getting out of paying taxes that they ought to, often without fully understanding just what a loophole is. In particular the use of the phrase tax avoidance is used by politicians and those advocating higher taxes in such a way as to imply they view it as tax evasion. Firstly

Reply to The Bible: Rape victims should be stoned to death in Religion JoeUser Forums

[quote] This is considered adultery because out of the honor and sanctity of her engagement (which is MUCH different than today) to her future husband has been betrayed [/quote] But it's not a betrayal if they're raped, because people don't choose to get raped - it's forced on them by someone else. [quote] If the woman was being taken against her will, why would she NOT scream? [/quote] Maybe they're gagged, or drugged, or forcibly silenced in some other way? Maybe the