Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- U.N.'s World Health Organization Eyeing Global Tax
So..
They want to tax people (who are not their citizens), for goods and services which the WHO/UN has nothing to do with supporting or providing?
Making money off of something that isn't yours, which you have no responsibility or attachment to, from people that neither elected you nor have any connection to you.
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
As unclear on the concept of proper boundaries as they are, I'm sure they'd be fine with it.
They want to tax people (who are not their citizens), for goods and services which the WHO/UN has nothing to do with supporting or providing?
Making money off of something that isn't yours, which you have no responsibility or attachment to, from people that neither elected you nor have any connection to you.
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
As unclear on the concept of proper boundaries as they are, I'm sure they'd be fine with it.
rdx-fx wrote:
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
article wrote:
The idea is the most lucrative — and probably the most controversial — of a number of schemes proposed by a 25-member panel of medical experts
rdx-fx wrote:
and go fuck their wife wives for me.
Nature is a powerful force. Those who seek to subdue nature, never do so permanently.
never happen
not gonna happen...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
It's only one of a number of proposals put forward and will probably never be accepted. Traditionally Governments would pledge a certain amount of their GDP's towards such schemes but apparently this method would generate significantly more revenue. The purpose of the 'tax' is quite noble (i.e. the research and development of medicine for the developing world) but, as rdx-fx points out, being taxed by a group that you have no direct connection with in terms of voting is a recipe for corruption.
Fuck that shit.The report approvingly cites a levy in Brazil that charged 0.38 percent on bills paid online
I agree with Braddock. The US in particular, if I'm not mistaken, donates more money than any other country. However, we donate a much smaller percentage of our GDP compared to others. I remember reading that if we donated 2% of our GDP we could end global hunger or something like that. Probably partially wishful thinking.
That's true, according to many sources. The US donates the most in terms of actual hard cash but it is a good bit down the table when it comes to the percentage of their GDP. The US could probably just redirect some of their aid to Israel to this WHO scheme and solve world hunger that way, and y'all could still use your interwebz without any additional charges!Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Fuck that shit.The report approvingly cites a levy in Brazil that charged 0.38 percent on bills paid online
I agree with Braddock. The US in particular, if I'm not mistaken, donates more money than any other country. However, we donate a much smaller percentage of our GDP compared to others. I remember reading that if we donated 2% of our GDP we could end global hunger or something like that. Probably partially wishful thinking.
Oversight is the big issue, people don't care when the Government divvy up their tax dollars themselves and decide how much the WHO get, but the minute the average Joe actually sees an additional charge on his receipt or on his tax returns it becomes 'real' and very annoying.
Haha if that happens then bye-bye WHO.
There was a revolution about that roughly 234 years ago.Braddock wrote:
It's only one of a number of proposals put forward and will probably never be accepted. Traditionally Governments would pledge a certain amount of their GDP's towards such schemes but apparently this method would generate significantly more revenue. The purpose of the 'tax' is quite noble (i.e. the research and development of medicine for the developing world) but, as rdx-fx points out, being taxed by a group that you have no direct connection with in terms of voting is a recipe for corruption.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
We're all citizens of the world.rdx-fx wrote:
So..
They want to tax people (who are not their citizens), for goods and services which the WHO/UN has nothing to do with supporting or providing?
Making money off of something that isn't yours, which you have no responsibility or attachment to, from people that neither elected you nor have any connection to you.
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
As unclear on the concept of proper boundaries as they are, I'm sure they'd be fine with it.
If they could guarantee a lack of corruption, I might support this.
That's absolutely fucking ridiculous, as if countries the world over aren't in enough financial shit already, two Non-Governmental Organisations are wanting to come in and tax the fuck out of underserving people?
It's bad enough that there's ATMs over here that charge you to take out your money, but the UN/WHO charging you? What the hell is it for?
Just read the first few paragraphs. So they're wanting to take our money and pump it into r&d in underdeveloped, under-educated countries? How about leave the money where it is and let the Educated uni grads take care of it
It's bad enough that there's ATMs over here that charge you to take out your money, but the UN/WHO charging you? What the hell is it for?
Just read the first few paragraphs. So they're wanting to take our money and pump it into r&d in underdeveloped, under-educated countries? How about leave the money where it is and let the Educated uni grads take care of it
Last edited by CammRobb (2010-01-16 06:00:03)
Who's going to tax us?
/sorry
/sorry
You forgot your [/sarcasm] tags.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We're all citizens of the world.rdx-fx wrote:
So..
They want to tax people (who are not their citizens), for goods and services which the WHO/UN has nothing to do with supporting or providing?
Making money off of something that isn't yours, which you have no responsibility or attachment to, from people that neither elected you nor have any connection to you.
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
As unclear on the concept of proper boundaries as they are, I'm sure they'd be fine with it.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
no, I don't think I did.FEOS wrote:
You forgot your [/sarcasm] tags.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We're all citizens of the world.rdx-fx wrote:
So..
They want to tax people (who are not their citizens), for goods and services which the WHO/UN has nothing to do with supporting or providing?
Making money off of something that isn't yours, which you have no responsibility or attachment to, from people that neither elected you nor have any connection to you.
SERE, find whoever wrote this 'plan', and go fuck their wife for me.
As unclear on the concept of proper boundaries as they are, I'm sure they'd be fine with it.
So, this is the same WHO/UN that pulls this kinda bullshit?
Security concerns cause doctors to leave hospital, quake victims
Security concerns cause doctors to leave hospital, quake victims
He meant I forgot my sarcasm tags. Which I did.rdx-fx wrote:
no, I don't think I did.FEOS wrote:
You forgot your [/sarcasm] tags.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We're all citizens of the world.
This proposal is right up there with the individual identifier number so that every person and their actions on the internet would be known.
It almost sounds like the second half of the same propsal.
It almost sounds like the second half of the same propsal.
Oh, right.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
He meant I forgot my sarcasm tags. Which I did.
Mind kinda wandered off at my quote there.
Had the image of a slightly drunk SERE, complete with 14 days beard growth, wandering into a UN/WHO meeting, one eyebrow cocked, and demanding;
"Allright. Imma here und'r orders to be fucking y'alls wives! Hand 'em over, cute ones first!"
It bothers me it even made the list of suggestions. Kinda gives me a better idea of who we are dealing with.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
It bothers you that somebody put forward something as a suggestion? You're not a big fan of thinking outside the box then?LividBovine wrote:
It bothers me it even made the list of suggestions. Kinda gives me a better idea of who we are dealing with.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- U.N.'s World Health Organization Eyeing Global Tax