I think all taxes on all income should be replaced with the fair. What you earn is yours and the government has no right to decide how much they'll let you keep. No corp taxes, no hidden taxes and every citizen is allowed the exact same basic deduction which is truly fair. Those who have will buy and pay the tax and the more they buy the more they pay. In the meantime those who can't afford to buy much will be able to buy more once the hidden taxes are removed from the price of goods we pay state sales tax on.
I see your point. A tax on productivity is a punishment for being productive. Why discriminate against Labor and then reward Land and Capital for creating jobs for Labor that you just killed with your tax on Labor? |
|
|
|
|
Unknown if you're vindicating the current situation because Syria was/is "probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East", but I hope not. Surely, Pakistan, Iran, and China are more deserving of an uprooting US-armed insurgency if we're citing state sponsored terrorism and gross human rights violations.
|
|
|
|
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting. I can't say that I agree with your assessment of motives. That's not unexpected. Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf. Syria was one of the most common places for us to turn extraordinarily rendered prisoners over to in the Middle East, with the other being Jordan. Not sure what the point is supposed to be though? A lot of that took place under the previous administration in the early 2000s. Current numbers are much harder to come by. Difficult to say if the Obama Administration's concurrent antagonistic position on Syria has been rendered legitimate because of state sponsored terrorism indictments or by increasingly strained relations facilitated by Israel. It's generally been US policy to have cool relations with Syria. They were added to out extended Axis of Evil list long before President Obama came to office. Now, he didn't have to continue with said policy, but Syria has never shown much interest in working towards mutual goals with us (we don't share many) and indeed decided to do the opposite in Iraq through their support for insurgents. Because there are (was?) a greater disparity between Palestinian terror operatives residing in Syria-Damascus than AQI elements. Consider that Syria has provided support to AQI and allegedly other anti-coalition militias since approximately 2005. One has to speculate on the sudden political attitude adjustment. |
|
|
|
The Fiscal Fizzle For much of the past five years readers of the political and economic news were left in little doubt that budget deficits and rising debt were the most important issue facing America. Serious people constantly issued dire warnings that the United States risked turning into another Greece any day now. President Obama appointed a special, bipartisan commission to propose solutions to the alleged fiscal crisis, and spent much of his first term trying to negotiate a Grand Bargain on the budget with Republicans.
That bargain never happened, because Republicans refused to consider any deal that raised taxes. Nonetheless, debt and deficits have faded from the news. And there’s a good reason for that disappearing act: The whole thing turns out to have been a false alarm. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/Paul-Krugman-An-Imaginary-Budget-and-Debt-Crisis.html?&_r=0This from Krugman? Lol. The same guy who thought the internet would have only as much impact as a fax machine and opines about bitcoin (and other things) without having even a teaspoon of knowledge. The lap dog of the authoritarians? I rarely resort to ad hominem, but I make an exception for Paul Krugman. He is worst kind of "intellectual." The only remarkable thing about him is how he paints his failures as successes and hoodwinks adoring, uncritical liberals with his columns. While I am not a fan of his articles, saying the only remarkable thing about him is his ability to hoodwink people rather ignores the actual contributions he has made to trade theory. Hate him if you'd like, but he has helped to advance our understanding of economic trade theory. |
|
|
|
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting. I can't say that I agree with your assessment of motives. That's not unexpected. Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf. Syria was one of the most common places for us to turn extraordinarily rendered prisoners over to in the Middle East, with the other being Jordan. Not sure what the point is supposed to be though? A lot of that took place under the previous administration in the early 2000s. Current numbers are much harder to come by. Difficult to say if the Obama Administration's concurrent antagonistic position on Syria has been rendered legitimate because of state sponsored terrorism indictments or by increasingly strained relations facilitated by Israel. |
|
|
|
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting. I can't say that I agree with your assessment of motives. That's not unexpected. Al-Assad's Syrian regime was the most common destination for detainees under our extraordinary rendition program. When Syrian borne jihadists were being wasted by Marine Corps infantry in Al Muwaffiqiyah, Syrian intelligence personnel were busy pulling out the fingernails of AQ and Taliban scumbags on our behalf. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what would be the next intelligent dominant species on Earth, if we destroy ourselves. The thing about man is that we've reached a point where if we destroy ourselves it's either going to be in such a way as to render the earth uninhabitable for more advanced species or we're going to wreck the planet first and that will result in our destruction (or, if it takes long enough, abandonment). When we're gone, I expect that the insects will take over, but I don't see any sign that an intelligent race will rise out of them.
|
|
|
|
so one conceptual thing i don't totally understand. if israel in some sense stole the lands from the palestinians, didn't the palestinians steal the land from the romans, who stole the land from the greeks, who stole the land from the persians, who stole the land from the babylonians, who stole the land from the assyrians, who stole the land from the jews? i don't understand why the "right" to the land started arbitrarily at one point in time (so the argument seems to me to go).
'palestinians' are a new creation/fabrication. A weapon to use against Israel. They are Arabs. If you look at their surnames, many of them betray their origin. Far from being a 'palestinan' people, one of the most common names in Gaza is "Al-Masri" which means "The Egyptian". By this logic since Israelis are mostly Russian and Polish and should be summarily sent back to their countries of origin. Ignorant biased comment 200 Palestinians killed -> Human shields, missiles hidden in their houses 2 Israeli soldiers killed -> War crime Half of Israel's six million Jews are from North Africa, Southwest Asia, and Ethiopia. The other three million are Eastern European. I just had to clarify this. |
|
|
|
|
I really cannot comprehend how there is an "anti isreal" argument in this, let alone mass riots in other countries against them defending their citizens.
It pretty much is this is my mind... If you are against Isreal in this conflict, you are an anti-semitic piece of shit human who deserves to die choking on your own feces.
|
|
|
|
scavenger birds have the gift of flight and could prey on many things on the ground, same as flying insects. Of course the swarming number of cockroaches and ants are a mighty force, worms who can go under ground and feed on our rotting flesh. Many insects sacrifice themselves for the collective by nature, a big advantage, (except for the few libertarian insects who will be killed by the others). If they ever developed the consciousness to attack mankind we'd all be dead and an endless food source for them
overall flies and ants will end up the victors, they will form an alliance until some advance aliens discover our barren planet not realizing what awaits them as food for the ants and flies. More advanced species will come and have the same fate, until all intelligent life in the universe are consumed by the ants and flies
lolololol that made me laugh. As long as there's no mosquitos involved. Please add to the story of the alliance a crusade both species go on to wipe out the mosquito population of the world. Flies in aerial formation divebombings on mosquitoes...ants diligently filling up the marshes with landfill to choke off the areas where mosquitoes can reproduce... |
|
|
|
However, there are a few truly scary prospects for organic humankind if it ever happens. Here's one, a techno-futuristic cautionary tale: WARNING: Reading this article may commit you to an eternity of suffering and torment. Slender Man. Smile Dog. Goatse. These are some of the urban legends spawned by the Internet. Yet none is as all-powerful and threatening as Roko’s Basilisk. For Roko’s Basilisk is an evil, godlike form of artificial intelligence, so dangerous that if you see it, or even think about it too hard, you will spend the rest of eternity screaming in its torture chamber. It's like the videotape in The Ring. Even death is no escape, for if you die, Roko’s Basilisk will resurrect you and begin the torture again. Are you sure you want to keep reading? Because the worst part is that Roko’s Basilisk already exists. Or at least, it already will have existed—which is just as bad. ... The idea is that merely by negatively affecting the possibility of the coming into existence of this particular demon-intelligence NOW, the super-being, having attained the ability to retroactively punish those who didn't help it come into being, will wreak revenge. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/07/roko_s_basilisk_the_most_terrifying_thought_experiment_of_all_time.htmlvery interesting article, umair. However, the author has to make up his mind as to whether the supercomputer "which knows just about everything," or has always been right in the past. If the former, I'm a two-boxes guy, because the but if the latter, then a one box guy. Yudkowsky is a moral utilitarian: He believes that that the greatest good for the greatest number of people is always ethically justified, even if a few people have to die or suffer along the way. He has explicitly argued that given the choice, it is preferable to torture a single person for 50 years than for a sufficient number of people (to be fair, a lot of people) to get dust specks in their eyes. I don't know how many is "sufficient", but I can see a situation in which were enough people to get dust specks in their eyes, at least some people would die as a consequence, maybe it causes a car accident that kills an entire family, or some angry person lashes out at a child...to me, sufficient would be about 100,000 but yes, at that number, I'd consider that there were sufficient harm that would ensue by probability that it would justify the torture of that single person. How could anyone think different? |
|
|
|
|
A few years ago, a decade or more, there was this HUGE forest fire in China. I've read that as a consequence of that fire weather patterns in the western hemisphere are being altered because there is no way to block the siberian and tundra wins going into to China.
If, in order to sustain our civilization, we must totally wreck the earth, as it seems we are doing slowly but steadily, in the long run, are we not in fact already on the path of the Ebola virus--reproducing till we kill the very host that sustains us?
|
|
|
|
The idea that awareness and technology and "moral aptitude" are the height of advancement is a likeable one. However, we have no data to go on but a sample of one.......one civilization in one species. Who is to say that every time intelligence and technology evolve in our universe the species rarely lasts over a few thousand years longer? Maybe we don't want to know the stats...... if they exist.....and do stats exist if no one is aware of them? OK that is another subject.
There are those among us who believe it is human hubris to think man can change the planet. We certainly have the nuclear material to change the planet quickly. What will become of all the waste we store, of all the waste entering the sea and accumulating in Japan and the north Pacific, of Chernobyl, of the future "releases"?
well, aren't there species who have already changed the earth? Consider bees. What would the earth be like without their pollinization efforts? Do their efforts directly relate to the type of species that make up the flora of different continents, and, given that, the animals that will be able to survive in them? On the parasite question, though, if we are to accept those three terms, I would have to put us in the latter. Consider what we have to do to the earth to make it work for us. What was the Dust Bowl caused by? The stripping of trees from California for development left the topsoil without any protection and it literally all blew away. |
|
|
|
It's worth remembering that, unlike the Iraqi government that we actually toppled, the Assad Regime that became embattled in a domestic conflict against its own people actually was a widespread supporter of terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda in Iraq. In fact, it was probably one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East if you don't count Saudi religious missionary spending. I've been a bit surprised at how nostalgic some people have seem to become for the good old days of enemy dictatorship past.
It seems many individuals have also become quite nostalgic to proxy wars. Western and Saudi support for anti-Syrian government militias was originally intended to drag Iran/Hezbollah and Russia into a bloody protracted conflict. But in unforeseen circumstances, evidence now indicates Iran and its' foreign warfighting elements are effectively managing this nasty little campaign by intentionally supplying arms against the same rebels they are fighting. |
|
|
|
Right now, I think Israel is in the right for going after Hamas. Just like they went after Hezbollah in 2006 and the last time they went after Hamas in 2009. Agreed, that much is obvious. Sadly many can't see it. The news wires only start reporting when Israel responds to rocket fire. They didn't bother reporting for the 3 weeks prior to the flare-up when Israel kept warning Hamas to stop firing rockets to no avail. |
|
|
|
|
Those Middle-Easterners need to watch 'Schindler's List' ….They love a bit of Nazism, the 'palestinians'
|
|
|
|
|
The man is a nasty fool. His policy would probably have the opposite effect. And after all, a suicide bomber is just a poor man's drone strike. Both equally nasty.
|
|
|
|
|
He is right. The debt ceiling crises are completely artificial in nature .....
|
|
|
|
|
Another day in the lives of women under the brutality of Islam.. there will be no justice or redemption for this girl until Islam is eradicated from the earth!!!
|
|
|
|
The second intelligent species on a planet doesn't get to evolve naturally. In fact, no matter how many intelligent species evolve......they would all be burdened with the society of the first. They don't get to evolve their own religion because we will spoon feed them ours when they are susceptible. Then again they would want to develop their own since there is no special place in ours for them. They don't get to invent anything, everything they could possibly need would have been invented by us. It would be a very very very long time before they would be treated as equals. Possibly never among humans who still believe in a god who created us in "his" image.
I think I have a few screenplays here. A punctuated development of a secondary species accelerates and surpasses the first evolved, creating a battle for dominance and a world that changes rapidly to suit the new dominant. A second screenplay is one where humans grapple with some of the questions above as a second species becomes fully sentient like equality, the truth of our own religion, etc.
but doesn't that assume, that the next species hasn't already developed its own intelligence, but hasn't yet as a species gotten to the point where it can compete with humans? If ants already have a sentience of their own, might they not have already their own religion--hell, talk about fertility goddesses, theirs would outrank our own by a million levels. It's not necessarily that the next dominant species needs to come after humans, simply that they need to replace us as we die out. Your point about inventing anything is important--the drive for technology being a hallmark of an advanced species--but their world would assuredly be far different from ours, and we're not nearly at the level of nanotechnology that ants might developed to create and build their own world. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
