It always comes back to "but look at all of these wonderful things you get from the money we stole".
Then stop using the services. "Don't use the government if you don't want to pay." Me not using any services does not change the stance of government stealing from me.
Which services are you using currently? "but...uhh...ya..but...Roads!1!!" should be paid per use (modern technology and all)
Just stop using the roads.
|
|
|
You didn't ask me that question. You asked someone else that question.
However, I directly asked you a question which you are now avoiding.
That's right. I asked someone else that question. However, you chose to respond to a simple 3 word question with a rant, which I didn't even bother reading most of and a question at the end. Interesting. If you didn't bother reading it, how do you qualify it as a rant? There really was no rant in my statement. And if you didn't bother reading it, then I'm not sure why you're even replying here. I'm under no obligation to respond to your rants or answer your questions. Nor do I have any intention in doing so. Not a game I'm interested in playing.
Frankly, you have answered my question by indicating that you lack any real understanding of the topic. Really, wasn't your question just a meme that originated from someone else? It's hardly your question, and I doubt you have anything original to say about the subject. I was just pointing out that you didn't even answer the simple question. Which tells me all I need to know.
It doesn't tell you anything. In response to the question that really isn't yours, I'd have to say the answer is, in a sense, 'Yes'. But I in no way expect you to answer my question directly (which isn't a meme), even though I have now answered the question you copy and pasted, because, frankly, you haven't thought it through with any form of individual thought - instead, you're just a meme repeater. Good day, sir!
|
|
|
Just because you insist that the government doesn't provide any services to you, others believe the government should. And so the government does provide services to others. And, those services are then used by you (think roads, fire protection, etc.).
It would be so trivially easy to solve that issue by just having the government declare your property foreign land, establish your property border as a foreign country border, and block services from entering your property, and you from exciting without a travel visa. Why doesn't the government just do that then? For the same reason that if own an island that is sovereign, it is my choice as to whether I sell parcels to others where their property is then sovereign to them, or instead, I choose to grant them rights instead. Can you tell me that I am required to do the former, as opposed to the latter?
|
|
|
I don't buy the premise that taxation is theft.
*waits for flames*
Is tax voluntary? Just because you insist that the government doesn't provide any services to you, others believe the government should. And so the government does provide services to others. And, those services are then used by you (think roads, fire protection, etc.). Now, there are two things here: - You can't tell others that they can't have the services the government provides in exchange for payment of taxes. - I suspect that you will never stop helping yourself to the services the government provides. Where does that leave you? Didn't answer the question. Here's a hint. Yes or no are the possible answers. You didn't ask me that question. You asked someone else that question. However, I directly asked you a question which you are now avoiding.
|
|
|
I don't buy the premise that taxation is theft.
*waits for flames*
Is tax voluntary? Just because you insist that the government doesn't provide any services to you, others believe the government should. And so the government does provide services to others. And, those services are then used by you (think roads, fire protection, etc.). Now, there are two things here: - You can't tell others that they can't have the services the government provides in exchange for payment of taxes. - I suspect that you will never stop helping yourself to the services the government provides. Where does that leave you?
|
|
|
Do any of you feel as deficient as I when it comes to having properly explored the various essential and desirable film canons and film movements out there? I mean, I'll admit that I'm not even aware of the some of the correct labels to apply to the various canons, sadly.
I certainly haven't done a decent job of exploring the French New Wave, the Czech New Wave, Bergman's works (if that could be considered a canon unto itself). I very definitely have developed an affinity for the Japanese New Wave, post WWII Japanese melodrama, a smattering of the Taiwan New Wave, some modern Korean cinema, Hong Kong cinema (through the lens of Wong Kar-Wai's lenses), and some modern films from mainland China. So much to explore, though.
|
|
|
Doesn't use of word 'Official' imply a centralized system?
You broke the rules. You're supposed to only say one word. With that said, this thread has the following qualities: - No theme - No meaning - Nothing in it is interesting - No real chain of thought - Nothing memorable - Nothing worthwhile - No requirement for cerebral thought - Is not stimulating to readers - Is not stimulating to contributors
|
|
|
The iPhone is for people who aren't into computers for computer's sake, but are into computers for productivity. The Android is for people who are into computers for the sake of experimenting with computers.
The iPhone is for people who want quality apps that do things useful in a wide variety of niche applications. The Android is for people who want junky apps that aren't polished, but they can point to the app and say: "Look, we have an app too, and we don't have to abide by Apple's rules."
For the record, I have an Android.
|
|
|
One of us doesn't understand the concept of easter eggs
That would be you? Wow calm down I'm talking about OP I'm the only one who mentioned Easter eggs here. Your post followed mine, both sequentially, and soon after mine in time. Your ambiguous response invited my retort. Maybe instead you could explain your take on the matter? I'm sure it would be interesting. Now that you have clarified your stance, what I suspect you meant, in a nutshell, is this: Easter eggs are just that, Easter eggs. They are not to be construed as some type of indication of continuity within a shared universe.
|
|
|
One of us doesn't understand the concept of easter eggs
That would be you?
|
|
|
I'm not convinced. If the directors and creative powers at Pixar say it's the case, then I will be convinced.
It's a known fact that beginning with the founding of Pixar, their goal was to animate, and one of their tenets or principles is to imbue life into things which are not necessarily living, or human, anyway. Hence the cars, the robots, the toys, and so forth. Talking animals are popular due to the uncanny valley. Pixar has avoided humans, but slowly has been working towards human animation in more recent features.
Furthermore, Pixar loves easter eggs, hence the books and posters and other objects that are references to other Pixar movies.
And finally, Pixar is a company where the production of props is an expensive process. Reusing 3d models here and there is a win, both in terms of labor savings and in terms of easter eggs.
|
|
|
Harry and the Henderson's ainec
Not only did I have to look up the title of the movie, but I also had to look up the meaning of the acronym. Now, if there's a place in your heart for this movie, then that's what is important. You simply can't argue with that. That being said, I have noted that it isn't exactly a film that gets many stars. Maybe you should watch Sansho the Bailiff to counteract the low star rating, and it should counteract any warm and fuzzy feeling you may have gotten from Harry and the Hendersons as well. Here's a clip (despite the hiss, turn the volume up to hear the ghostly lyrics): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh9quT-m7Sk
|
|
|
going to have to find a way : haters~~~ Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States Hulu is committed to making its content available worldwide. To do so, we must work through a number of legal and business issues, including obtaining international streaming rights. Know that we are working to make this happen and will continue to do so. Given the international background of the Hulu team, we have both a professional and personal interest in bringing Hulu to a global audience. So? I have posted about twenty other clips, most or none from Hulu.
|
|
|
|