Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Eukaryote, Jun 24, 2006.
And Do Not Feed Me Some Line About Prejudice Nd Racism!!!!!!!!!!!!! It Is Bulls**t!!!
I don't think the handicapped or mentally ill get competent medical care, at least compared to those who have money.
What country are you living in? The Vatican?
1 Tomsnowman- i agree, that is why i suggested the alternative in the first place.
2. dutch- America... duh... really it isnt that hard, for all that people complain, to pull yourself from poverty here, by getting an education. You will probably spend a long time paying off loans unless you are truly brilliant, or lucky, enough to get scholarships, but so what, you will be able to afford it with the income of a middle-class family.
1. Since you don't show info about you in your profile, I had to guess.
2. Do you really believe what you're saying? If you're born in a good family, you can grow up nicely, get an education, get a job, get a wive, and be happy. But what if you're born in the slums (yes, they're there in America), you're family killed or using drugs/alcohol. If you're first few years on earth are screwed like that, you won't be able to get out by yourself.
But you see, that's the problem - those that want to keep marijuana illegal would have a very popular reason to do so. "You don't have an absolute right to do whatever you want to your own body, because I am paying the doctors' bills for your body."
And "I" in the case above am a raging religious right fundy - do you want the 50% of the electorate that voted for Dubya to be deciding what you can do with your body, because they pay for half of it now?
Dutch: i know the slums are horrible... but anyone, regardless of adversity, can still succeed... they will have to work hard. The myth that the slums cripple people for life is true, but only in so far as they gain a sense of entitlement, from welfare, and it is vastly exaggerated because very few people acutally bother to work hard enough to get out. Have you ever driven through a slum in America? I have, and can honestly say that about 40% of the households in those i have seen have $30-40,000 vehicles. So many people have their priorities so screwed up that they buy a car before moving away from the violence. This is the true fruit of government "social programs."
Marijuana doesn't have to be all bad. I am talking about giving people the means to have medical care, which everyone should have. I don't see many conservatives trying to ban cigarette because they generate so much tax money. They are unhealthy. What if we taxed marijuana purchasing, would that make things better?
As to your second point, I know I am usually in the minority. But as of right now, half of our population does not support Bush.
I am going to have to strongly disagree with that. New Orleans perhaps? Many of the people who lived in slums did not have the means (vehical transportation) to get away from Katrina. Many who were poor or handicapped were screwed, we did nothing about it (we need universal health care). Many people in slums drive old cars, or use public transportation, not 30-40,000$ cars.
You must have a minimum income level (I forget how high) in order to have to pay federal income tax. If you make under that, you dont pay or you get a total refund when tax day comes around.
I agree with you - when we got the Katrina evacuees here and FEMA gave them $2k apiece, a LOT of people spent the money on everything from plasma tv's to jewelry to sex change operations. Then complained that they didn't get more.
First, I know right now half our population doesn't support Bush, but roughly half of our population does apparently vote for social conservatives as opposed to social liberals.
I fear you're missing my point, though. Marijuana certainly doesn't have to be all bad, and in fact I agree with you that it should be legalized. What I'm saying is that there is a substantial percentage of the electorate that hears the word 'marijuana' and immediately thinks "OMG gateway drug evil bad help DEA raid their house nooooooooo :thumbdown :suicide: " Fundamentally, I don't think that bloc of voters cares if marijuana causes cancer or not, they just want drugs to go away by any means necessary. On the flip side, there are liberals that want the government to make our lives as safe and as healthy as humanly possible - these are the ones bringing tobacco/fastfood lawsuits, calling for the regulation of pretty much everything, and insisting that the police and courts know what's best for us.
When politicians that are ordinarily on the opposite side of the aisle each have an agenda, it is far more likely that they cooperate to get each others' agenda passed, rather than opposing and in doing so not getting any progress on either agenda. In this case, you'll simply have provided more ammunition for each side to get much more embedded into what Americans may and may not do with their own bodies.
The thing is, in the UK at least, that the poorer you are the higher proportion of your income you are likely to spend on tobacco, petrol and alcohol, and these are taxed so heavily that you are likely to be paying far more in tax than someone on a high income.
Then maybe they should stop smoking, buy a bike and stop drinking stout as opposed to buying the necessities to survive.
The sort of tax you just mentioned is totally voluntary...a sin tax if you will. No one is forcing them to buy those goods.
Yes, that is true, but to a smaller extent here, as most of our tax money is collected directly from income, rather than through purchases. So in reality, in America, the rich and poor pay about the same percentage of their incomes, just in different fashions: the rich pay direct income tax (from which the poor are exempt), capital gains taxes (which really tend to hammer the rich), and a small part of their wealth to sales and property taxes; while the poor pay about the same percentage of their income (a much smaller amt. numerically, remember) but almost exclusively to various sales and property taxes
I was not commenting on the right or wrong of these people choose of how to spend their money. I was comenting on your statement that poor people did not pay tax.
Ah...but no one is forcing them to pay such a tax. That type of tax is like buying lotto tickets....totally voluntary.
You seem to indicate a belief here that increased Social Programs lead to reduced Social Mobility, the truth however appears to be the reverse based of studies on intergenerational Social Mobility that compared the US and other Countries.
The Full report as a PDF at this link
mobboss: yep... pretty much... but it does punish the poor to a certain extent, because noone can be expected to sacrifice all the comforts of life... and purchasing those will hurt the poor a little bit more than others. but the taxes are still perfectly just in my book
Those people call themselves Liberals, but they aren't liberals in the true meaning of the word.
Separate names with a comma.