DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> The Dream Team
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 476 - 500 of 519, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/14/2012 05:31:36 PM · #476
As I see it, certain countries are like thug criminals, or bad school bullies.

Sure, there's some very good people/traits about anyone or any place, but that isn't sufficient to redeem them for their negative qualities.

The problem is we have no way to effectively remove problem countries/cultures from circulation and isolate them.. The solution in the case of thug criminals is to have prisons to remove them from circulation, bullies have detention or suspension / expulsion to remove them from circulation in school. These solutions are necessary to remove the threat to the people who are well-behaved socially adapted folks.

But when it's a huge group of problem people, then what do you do with that? This is a HUGE problem our society is currently facing, and the issue seems to only be getting worse. Can we find a solution? What is it?

Message edited by author 2012-09-14 17:32:17.
09/14/2012 11:29:24 PM · #477
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

As to a solution - I dunno, but cut and run is looking pretty good. So is nuking the whole damn place (tongue slightly in cheek).
Political Science

Words and Music by Randy Newman

No one likes us
I don't know why.
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try.
But all around even our old friends put us down.
Let's drop the big one and see what happens.

We give them money
But are they grateful?
No they're spiteful
And they're hateful.
They don't respect us so let's surprise them;
We'll drop the big one and pulverize them.

Now Asia's crowded
And Europe's too old.
Africa's far too hot,
And Canada's too cold.
And South America stole our name.
Let's drop the big one; there'll be no one left to blame us.

Bridge:
We'll save Australia;
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo.
We'll build an all-American amusement park there;
They've got surfing, too.

Well, boom goes London,
And boom Paris.
More room for you
And more room for me.
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town.
Oh, how peaceful it'll be;
We'll set everybody free;
You'll have Japanese kimonos, baby,
There'll be Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow,
So let's drop the big one now.
Let's drop the big one now.
09/14/2012 11:37:27 PM · #478
Perspective from a Nobel laureate with recent experience in transitioning a country from religious conflict to secular democracy.

Message edited by author 2012-09-14 23:41:42.
09/15/2012 11:10:31 AM · #479
Originally posted by Cory:

As I see it, certain countries are like thug criminals, or bad school bullies.

Sure, there's some very good people/traits about anyone or any place, but that isn't sufficient to redeem them for their negative qualities.

The problem is we have no way to effectively remove problem countries/cultures from circulation and isolate them.. The solution in the case of thug criminals is to have prisons to remove them from circulation, bullies have detention or suspension / expulsion to remove them from circulation in school. These solutions are necessary to remove the threat to the people who are well-behaved socially adapted folks.

But when it's a huge group of problem people, then what do you do with that? This is a HUGE problem our society is currently facing, and the issue seems to only be getting worse. Can we find a solution? What is it?


I didn't know you felt this way about the US.
09/15/2012 02:59:32 PM · #480
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Bottom line to me is that our priorities right now should be energy independence so we can not give a rats ass what happens over there, and enough defense to protect ourselves and our allies.


In a capitalistic society how exactly is that suppose to happen? You don't strike me as someone who wants to give the government more control over things so who exactly is going to make us energy independent? Energy corporations?
09/15/2012 03:12:02 PM · #481
Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by Cory:

As I see it, certain countries are like thug criminals, or bad school bullies.

Sure, there's some very good people/traits about anyone or any place, but that isn't sufficient to redeem them for their negative qualities.

The problem is we have no way to effectively remove problem countries/cultures from circulation and isolate them.. The solution in the case of thug criminals is to have prisons to remove them from circulation, bullies have detention or suspension / expulsion to remove them from circulation in school. These solutions are necessary to remove the threat to the people who are well-behaved socially adapted folks.

But when it's a huge group of problem people, then what do you do with that? This is a HUGE problem our society is currently facing, and the issue seems to only be getting worse. Can we find a solution? What is it?


I didn't know you felt this way about the US.


Nah, I would have compared the US to a fat complacent ignorant cop.
09/15/2012 03:15:58 PM · #482
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by Cory:

As I see it, certain countries are like thug criminals, or bad school bullies.

Sure, there's some very good people/traits about anyone or any place, but that isn't sufficient to redeem them for their negative qualities.

The problem is we have no way to effectively remove problem countries/cultures from circulation and isolate them.. The solution in the case of thug criminals is to have prisons to remove them from circulation, bullies have detention or suspension / expulsion to remove them from circulation in school. These solutions are necessary to remove the threat to the people who are well-behaved socially adapted folks.

But when it's a huge group of problem people, then what do you do with that? This is a HUGE problem our society is currently facing, and the issue seems to only be getting worse. Can we find a solution? What is it?


I didn't know you felt this way about the US.


Nah, I would have compared the US to a fat complacent ignorant cop.


I was thinking self-appointed mall cop, myself.
09/16/2012 11:28:33 AM · #483
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Bottom line to me is that our priorities right now should be energy independence so we can not give a rats ass what happens over there, and enough defense to protect ourselves and our allies.


In a capitalistic society how exactly is that suppose to happen? You don't strike me as someone who wants to give the government more control over things so who exactly is going to make us energy independent? Energy corporations?


I don't think it would necessarily require more government control. But it would be nice to open up a bit of alaska, and allow offshore oil contracts, and not put further EPA requirements on coal power. My understanding is that we have plenty of cheap energy here in the states, but we restrict it so much that we cannot possibly become independent.

And goodness, when will the US get over our fear of nuclear power??
09/18/2012 12:23:54 AM · #484
A bit of a dichotomy, perhaps:

"...nearly one in six Americans in poverty, and the 23 million Americans who are struggling to find work. Mitt Romney's plan creates 12 million new jobs in four years, grows the economy and moves Americans off of government dependency and into jobs," Gail Gitcho, Romney's communications director, said in the statement."

and

"We have a very different approach - the president and I - between a government-dominated society and a society driven by free people pursuing their dreams," Romney said. (end quote)

I'm not sure how the Government creating 12 million jobs is removing us from a government-dominated society. Nor am I sure how either party would be able to CREATE jobs in the first place, unless they are Government jobs. You can create the climate, perhaps - and that's what some will argue - but the climate for what? Seems to me we already have enough STUFF and we don't even make the stuff we do have. 50 years ago the #2 job source in the US was manufacturing. That is now #7. So unless we quit outsourcing the manufacture of all the stuff we buy, I'm not seeing the opportunity for more jobs.
09/18/2012 12:56:07 PM · #485
I don't believe Romney was referring to the jobs as being government jobs. Obama does the same thing (but there have been jobs created under the government sector too). As you said, they believe that their policies will create environments where jobs and economies will grow. The numbers are merely educated guesses, and in my opinion, should be taken with a grain of salt. Both sides are going to say they will create jobs, it's a matter of "how" that really matters.

There are many other job sectors than manufacturing.

But to your point, stuff gets old, technology changes, styles change, things break. Imagine trying to do something as simple as editing one of your photos on an old windows 2005 computer. I think we will always have a need for new stuff.
09/18/2012 01:14:03 PM · #486
I think Mr. Romney has other things to worry about than the unemployment rate right now ... perhaps such as why he feels "entitled" to pay half the tax rate of ordinary working people.
09/18/2012 01:52:45 PM · #487
Feel free to explain your statement.
09/18/2012 01:57:59 PM · #488
Originally posted by JamesDowning:

Feel free to explain your statement.

I take it you haven't heard the latest "candid" video of Mr. Romney dismissing 47% of the US population (or at least Obama supporters) as "victims" who feel "entitled" to government support?

Originally posted by Linked Article:

During a private fundraiser earlier this year, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told a small group of wealthy contributors what he truly thinks of all the voters who support President Barack Obama. He dismissed these Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, who don't assume responsibility for their lives, and who think government should take care of them. Fielding a question from a donor about how he could triumph in November, Romney replied:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter whatâ€Â¦These are people who pay no income tax.

Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."


Message edited by author 2012-09-18 14:18:09.
09/18/2012 02:42:50 PM · #489
I've heard it. Put it in context. As you quoted, he was responding to how he could win in November. He wasn't saying that his job as president is not to worry about those people, but that he cannot focus on them to win the election. The worst thing he did was lump all of those 47% together under the umbrella of "believing that they are victims". The rest is somewhat true. The left has always been a friend of entitlements, and as Romney stated, "Those who are reliant on government are not as attracted to my message of slimming down the size of government".

Anyways, I was actually hoping you would explain the second half of your statement.
09/18/2012 03:04:39 PM · #490
Originally posted by JamesDowning:



But to your point, stuff gets old, technology changes, styles change, things break. Imagine trying to do something as simple as editing one of your photos on an old windows 2005 computer. I think we will always have a need for new stuff.

True, but none of the new stuff is made here. It is made in China, or Korea, or the Philippines. And no economic policy I can imagine would tempt anyone to manufacture, say, iPhones in the United States.

I just don't know what either side thinks the government can do to "create jobs".
09/18/2012 03:14:53 PM · #491
Originally posted by JamesDowning:

The left has always been a friend of entitlements


The Right is also big on sending Federal dollars to those it sees as being in need, they are just much better at it. Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs.$59 billion was spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion was spent on corporate subsidies in 2006. Conservative states generally get more Federal tax money than they send to the Fed, while liberal states send in more than they get back.

The "slimming down the size of government" talk is all over in the social welfare side, while the corporate welfare is ignored in the corner, quietly being shoveled money.

09/18/2012 03:23:49 PM · #492
Originally posted by JamesDowning:

Anyways, I was actually hoping you would explain the second half of your statement.

I was referring to the irony of him dismissing those lazy freeloaders as feeling "entitled" to handouts from the government, when he himself reaps millions in government largesse through claiming to be "entitled" to pay a lower tax rate than is paid by the person who cleans his toilet.
09/18/2012 03:27:04 PM · #493
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by JamesDowning:

Anyways, I was actually hoping you would explain the second half of your statement.

I was referring to the irony of him dismissing those lazy freeloaders as feeling "entitled" to handouts from the government, when he himself reaps millions in government largesse through claiming to be "entitled" to pay a lower tax rate than is paid by the person who cleans his toilet.

I love how some people think the government NOT TAKING your money is the equivalent of them GIVING you money.

btw, General, I was going to steal $50 out of your wallet, but I didn't. You can just call it a gift. Be sure to claim it on your taxes.
09/18/2012 03:33:18 PM · #494
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by JamesDowning:

Anyways, I was actually hoping you would explain the second half of your statement.

I was referring to the irony of him dismissing those lazy freeloaders as feeling "entitled" to handouts from the government, when he himself reaps millions in government largesse through claiming to be "entitled" to pay a lower tax rate than is paid by the person who cleans his toilet.

I love how some people think the government NOT TAKING your money is the equivalent of them GIVING you money.

BS -- he has money stashed away that, if he paid the same rate as I or anyone who earns (IRS terminology) their income does, would be offsetting the deficit or paying to protect our foreign oil supply ... he is getting special treatment by the government which allows him to possess more money than he would otherwise.

Taxes are how we pay for civilization, not "stealing" -- are you some kind of anarchist or just a survivalist?
09/18/2012 03:37:58 PM · #495
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by JamesDowning:

Anyways, I was actually hoping you would explain the second half of your statement.

I was referring to the irony of him dismissing those lazy freeloaders as feeling "entitled" to handouts from the government, when he himself reaps millions in government largesse through claiming to be "entitled" to pay a lower tax rate than is paid by the person who cleans his toilet.

I love how some people think the government NOT TAKING your money is the equivalent of them GIVING you money.

BS -- he has money stashed away that, if he paid the same rate as I or anyone who earns (IRS terminology) their income does, would be offsetting the deficit or paying to protect our foreign oil supply ... he is getting special treatment by the government which allows him to possess more money than he would otherwise.

Taxes are how we pay for civilization, not "stealing" -- are you some kind of anarchist or just a survivalist?

If you are saying he is illegally concealing assets, then I agree with you - he is "stealing". I have not seen any evidence of that (nor formal charges for that matter). In any case, I actually wasn't referring only to Romney or your particular statement above. I am referring to any "tax cuts" or "not raising taxes" being calculated as "spending" or "costing" the government money.
09/18/2012 03:53:40 PM · #496
I am referring to the fact that Romney's income, primarily from capital gains and dividends (aka "unearned income") is taxed at a nominal 15% rate, while wages (aka "earned income") are taxed at a nominal 30% rate. Why should he be "entitled" to this special treatment by the government which means he keeps more money than I am?
09/18/2012 04:00:29 PM · #497
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

I have not seen any evidence of that (nor formal charges for that matter). In any case, I actually wasn't referring only to Romney or your particular statement above.


Part of the clamor for Romney to release his tax records is that there are indications that he took advantage of the tax amnesty in 2009 after the Swiss bank UBS (where Romney had accounts) came to an agreement with U.S. government, which had accused it of participating in a multi-billion-dollar tax-avoidance scheme.

I am not sure this story has any more legs than the Obama birth certificate story.
09/18/2012 04:15:44 PM · #498
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I am referring to the fact that Romney's income, primarily from capital gains and dividends (aka "unearned income") is taxed at a nominal 15% rate, while wages (aka "earned income") are taxed at a nominal 30% rate. Why should he be "entitled" to this special treatment by the government which means he keeps more money than I am?

Because that's how the tax code currently reads. There are/were legitimate arguments for why this is the way it is which may or may not be valid now (or even then).

I understand that in relation to the entitlements comments, you could use the same argument "the law allows for this". I don't disagree with that. We all have our opinions about tax policy and entitlement policy and THAT will determine how I vote much more than some insensitive comments made by any candidate. For the record, and I'm sure I have stated this before, I am NOT a fan of Romney, nor of the Republican party. For me, they are currently and generally the lesser of the two evils. For many here, Obama is just that. For some, Democrats and Obama particularly can do no wrong and frankly their views are extreme, fringe, etc. so I don't pay much attention to them. Same is true of some on the right, although I personally run into far fewer of them and I have the same attitude about them.
09/18/2012 04:19:56 PM · #499
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I am referring to the fact that Romney's income, primarily from capital gains and dividends (aka "unearned income") is taxed at a nominal 15% rate, while wages (aka "earned income") are taxed at a nominal 30% rate. Why should he be "entitled" to this special treatment by the government which means he keeps more money than I am?


Can we please stop with these apples and oranges percentage rates. They are completely unhelpful. Nobody in the US is paying friggin 30% of their income as income tax. Wait, Gingrich claimed 31% was his number. Anyway, nobody that isn't rich is paying that number.

Why don't we tax the rich at a 99% nominal rate, but they get to deduct 96% of their income? At least we can say, "hey! they are paying a 99% nominal rate!" and all feel better, right?

Message edited by author 2012-09-18 16:25:28.
09/18/2012 04:24:58 PM · #500
The current tax system forces us to throw apples and oranges at each other - so nothing changes - I'm surprised someone hasn't propose a tax on fruit.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 06/28/2025 08:28:47 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/28/2025 08:28:47 AM EDT.