BF2S Forums what, no "hate crime" ?

Hate crime laws are silly but if it means putting a violent offender in jail longer then I can live with that. Ideally we should do away with hate crime laws altogether and just raise prison terms for violent crimes in general.

Macbeth wrote:

Hate crime laws are silly but if it means putting a violent offender in jail longer then I can live with that. Ideally we should do away with hate crime laws altogether and just raise prison terms for violent crimes in general.

kill a person, get a nice dirt hole. simple and cheap.

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Uh...   so supporting a poll tax isn't cynical....?

Anyway, if you need proof of the power of lobbyism, just take a stroll down K Street.

You're so worried about the poor having too much power, yet the poor are among the least reliable of voting blocs.  One of the only groups less active in voting is college kids.

Your argument might work with the elderly continually pushing for more funding for SS or Medicare, but that's not just the poor pushing an agenda there.

The majority of pork in government goes to corporate interests -- that's where most of the power is, like with Wall Street.  The bailouts should be rather obvious evidence that big business has a much greater effect on our government than the poor.

You do understand that 'pork' spending makes up less than 12% of the annual budget right? And that the vast majority of it goes to smaller states and those states whose representatives happen to be on powerful committees right? Very little goes to Wall Street, sorry to break the news to you.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … Y_2007.png

So, is your argument that the elderly have too much power?  That's a distinctly different argument than one that the poor have too much power.

They do too. Apparently once one retires it becomes ones life ambition to squeeze as many pennies as one can out of the government before croaking. As a bloc, they don't seem to give a damn about the future prosperity of the country because they won't be around to enjoy it. Where you would expect wisdom, you instead get grasping. It's so fucking lame but there isn't a damn thing we can do about it (except institute a poll tax that only allows wage earners to vote).

This is one of the pleasant side effects of supposedly taking away peoples need to plan for their future and retirement and making them dependent on the government instead. Medicare and Social Security are a damn blight.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-07-28 13:33:54)

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

So, is your argument that the elderly have too much power?  That's a distinctly different argument than one that the poor have too much power.

They do too. Apparently once one retires it becomes ones life ambition to squeeze as many pennies as one can out of the government before croaking. As a bloc, they don't seem to give a damn about the future prosperity of the country because they won't be around to enjoy it. Where you would expect wisdom, you instead get grasping. It's so fucking lame but there isn't a damn thing we can do about it (except institute a poll tax that only allows wage earners to vote).

This is one of the pleasant side effects of supposedly taking away peoples need to plan for their future and retirement and making them dependent on the government instead. Medicare and Social Security are a damn blight.

A poll tax wouldn't do much to prevent the elderly from voting.  The money they have, as you pointed out, comes from the rest of us.

It would prevent much of the poor from voting, but it would also eliminate any pretenses of equal representation in this country.

Country wasn't founded as a democracy...

"Our democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those who are willing to work
and give to those who would not."

- Thomas Jefferson


A democracy is always temporary in nature;
it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover
that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates
who promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that every democracy will finally collapse
due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship

- Alexander Tytler 1787


There's plenty more. Democracy is a nice feel good idea but it's never good in practice.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Country wasn't founded as a democracy....

Well, yeah...  It was founded by rich landowners who didn't want to continue paying their taxes. 

JohnG@lt wrote:

"Our democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those who are willing to work
and give to those who would not."

- Thomas Jefferson


A democracy is always temporary in nature;
it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover
that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates
who promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that every democracy will finally collapse
due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship

- Alexander Tytler 1787

Well, I suppose you can now see why I'm headed for Canada eventually. 

JohnG@lt wrote:

There's plenty more. Democracy is a nice feel good idea but it's never good in practice.

In terms of referendums, it's often a mistake, but in terms of democratic republics, it's not a bad practice until sectionalism (and corporatism) bring it down.

you cant equate the freedom of speech with allowing minors the same civic rights as adults.  the idea behind the market place is that that reason is the final arbitrator.  until the society we live in evolves to that point, we are going to have to depend on the high courts interpretation of the evolving standars of social decency.

Turquoise wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

you cant equate the freedom of speech with allowing minors the same civic rights as adults.  the idea behind the market place is that that reason is the final arbitrator.  until the society we live in evolves to that point, we are going to have to depend on the high courts interpretation of the evolving standars of social decency.

Well...  call me a cynic, but I don't think any society will ever evolve to a point where reason is the sole basis for laws.  Humans will always be emotional and somewhat traditional.

people also used leeches to cure evil spirits

eleven bravo wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

you cant equate the freedom of speech with allowing minors the same civic rights as adults.  the idea behind the market place is that that reason is the final arbitrator.  until the society we live in evolves to that point, we are going to have to depend on the high courts interpretation of the evolving standars of social decency.

Well...  call me a cynic, but I don't think any society will ever evolve to a point where reason is the sole basis for laws.  Humans will always be emotional and somewhat traditional.

people also used leeches to cure evil spirits

We've made progress...  lol...  I'm not denying that.  We currently live at a time where social progress is so much better than it was even just 100 years ago, but I think there is a limit to how logical we can become as a collective.  For example, I believe religion will always exist.  I believe we will always have prejudices -- they will never disappear, they will only be replaced with new prejudices.

lowing wrote:

Stubbee wrote:

lowing wrote:

lol silence is golden after 40 views.

maybe people are tired of your rants. silence doesn't mean you are right though. it could mean they don't about what you have to say anymore.

Well, humor me just this once and explain away that double standard. I mean if I am not right, it should be easy to show how I am wrong.

pleasuring old, creepy men is not my style. perhaps your wife would like to join the forums?

Phrozenbot wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Btw, I never specified a minimum income level, simply that a person should have to show that they paid taxes for the previous year before voting. Money granted by the government is not taxable income and because the tax thresholds are so high, there are millions people freeloading off the system right now.

And there are several corporations that haven't paid taxes for years....  like Exxon.

Is that true? Why does Exxon get a pass while the IRS will easily steam-roll any poor schmuck who owes the government money?

Well yeah...  The IRS is only willing to go after the little guy, because the little guy can't afford a crew of lawyers to defend against the government.