Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:34 PM
 
132 posts, read 159,075 times
Reputation: 101

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post
So you believe it to be OK to punish those with more money by taking a greater percentage of what they worked hard to earn? "The harder you work, the more you earn, the lesser the amount of your money you get to keep." Not exactly something that would motivate anyone to work harder. The rich would pay more - 10% of 1,000,000 is more than 10% of 1,000.
"punish" oh the drama....give me a break. No one is talking about taxing the life out of them

The sentence in bold is a joke right ? In the first scenario there is virtually no financial impact on someone's life, in the later case the person starves...
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:41 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,124,650 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockUnderMyKilt View Post
That's where our realities depart. To me, self-defense is the ultimate human right. To you it's "unprovoked belligerence".

I'll quote myself because it's easy. I said the US should be at peace with the world "Except with those who make war against the USA."

And you fault me for a defensive posture. Would you prefer I take an offensive one?
An overabundance of references to self-defense or the use of self-defense to define to a way of life only suggests that a person is working under duress, that they feel some threat, otherwise what is there to defend against? I'm saying the threat need not exist and that it is ultimately made real by the person who feels threatened. Which explains why countries stock arms and manufacture weapons or why people keep guns next to their beds. They operate from a perspective of fear yet justify it by calling it strength. If there is a fault to a defensive posture it is in the failure to realize that the threat exists only when you perceive it. It cannot exist otherwise. Peace requires no tools, it emanates from within and is created outwards. It is a state of balance and power, not weakness. Those who would 'make war against the USA' would be made powerless to do so once they realized and accepted that we are not a threat. Our energy should be spent manifesting that reality. Do we really need to be the threat they think we are with all our saber-rattling and big-stick-carrying? How do such actions accomplish peace? They don't. Humanity's history of self-destruction shows it still hasn't learned this difficult lesson.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Scotland
425 posts, read 651,861 times
Reputation: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
An overabundance of references to self-defense or the use of self-defense to define to a way of life only suggests that a person is working under duress, that they feel some threat, otherwise what is there to defend against? I'm saying the threat need not exist and that it is ultimately made real by the person who feels threatened. Which explains why countries stock arms and manufacture weapons or why people keep guns next to their beds. They operate from a perspective of fear yet justify it by calling it strength. If there is a fault to a defensive posture it is in the failure to realize that the threat exists only when you perceive it. It cannot exist otherwise. Peace requires no tools, it emanates from within and is created outwards. It is a state of balance and power, not weakness. Those who would 'make war against the USA' would be made powerless to do so once they realized and accepted that we are not a threat. Our energy should be spent manifesting that reality. Do we really need to be the threat they think we are with all our saber-rattling and big-stick-carrying? How do such actions accomplish peace? They don't. Humanity's history of self-destruction shows it still hasn't learned this difficult lesson.
Wow. So Osama Bin Laden would have been rendered powerless if we'd have simply abolished the military? Where on Earth were you on 9/10?

I'll modestly suggest that I'm as well-read in human history as anyone, and if there's anything I've learned is that history is never written by the ones who roll over and beg for peace. And before you say it let me first beg you to mention Gandhi.

Tell you what. I'll continue to live armed and ready to retaliate, and you can continue to complain and stay unarmed. How's that sound?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:48 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,124,650 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockUnderMyKilt View Post
Tell you what. I'll continue to live armed and in fear, and you can continue to stay unarmed. How's that sound?
Fine. After 50 years, I haven't had the need to arm myself. And if I die, so what? I'm infinite. I'll find something else to do, something FUN creative and peaceful.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:49 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,816,210 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockUnderMyKilt View Post
Wow. So Osama Bin Laden would have been rendered powerless if we'd have simply abolished the military? Where on Earth were you on 9/10?

Tell you what. I'll continue to live armed and ready to retaliate, and you can continue to complain and stay unarmed. How's that sound?
Wise men never argue with fools, because people from a distance can't tell who is who
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Scotland
425 posts, read 651,861 times
Reputation: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Fine. After 50 years, I haven't had the need to arm myself. And if I die, so what? I'm infinite. I'll find something else to do, something FUN creative and peaceful.
You place less value on your life than I do, that's your problem.

Personally, I want to spend as many years as possible breathing the sea air, walking the hills of Skye, sipping whiskey with my friends, and being a productive citizen. If any scumbag wants to prevent me from doing that, god help them.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 02:54 PM
 
9,848 posts, read 8,258,555 times
Reputation: 3296
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
US should be at peace with the world
US should get its financial house in order
US should let its citizens be themselves

It's the method to achieve these goals that is causing problems. If only we could approach the table, shake hands, and get down to the business of compromise and employ some American ingenuity, we could move forward at lightning speed.
As long as there are people, there will not be peace in the world, but you do the best you can.

Financial house in order? Balanced budget amendment has to be implemented to reel in spending. There is no other way. We are out of borrowing room, we never could avoid endless social programs and ever growing numbers of government employees, so we have hit that wall.

Citizens being themselves means what?
How about a rise in personal responsibility and maybe an adherence to one of those old Ten Commandments; THOU SHALL NOT COVET THEY NEIGHBOR'S GOODS!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 06:20 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,124,650 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockUnderMyKilt View Post
Wow. So Osama Bin Laden would have been rendered powerless if we'd have simply abolished the military? Where on Earth were you on 9/10?

I'll modestly suggest that I'm as well-read in human history as anyone, and if there's anything I've learned is that history is never written by the ones who roll over and beg for peace. And before you say it let me first beg you to mention Gandhi.

Tell you what. I'll continue to live armed and ready to retaliate, and you can continue to complain and stay unarmed. How's that sound?
Who said I was complaining, or is that what people who are 'ready to retaliate' do when they encounter an opinion that differs from theirs? Is there ever a moment you are not defensive? Is a different opinion really a threat?

Osama didn't do anything (but that's another thread). Abolishing the military was your choice of words, not mine. And I happened to have been listening to Rumsfeld on 9/10 tell us he couldn't find a missing $2.3 trillion. Funny how an issue that large vaporized within 24 hours.

Finally, if you are well-read in human history, perhaps you might have learned that physical reality is formed by the commanding power of thoughts and emotions and it doesn't matter how history is written because all sides are recorded equally. I never knew there had to be a winner. As I understand it, competition is only for those who need to measure the inequality between things.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2011, 06:24 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,124,650 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlockUnderMyKilt View Post
You place less value on your life than I do, that's your problem.

Personally, I want to spend as many years as possible breathing the sea air, walking the hills of Skye, sipping whiskey with my friends, and being a productive citizen. If any scumbag wants to prevent me from doing that, god help them.
I agree with your points, but I have a say in whether or not those scumbags come into my life and I don't need weaponry to prove it. I place as large a value on "life" as you do but I realize it's more than just a physical existence. You don't have to be in a body to be alive, in other words. It's nice sometimes though!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2011, 09:27 AM
 
9,855 posts, read 15,170,115 times
Reputation: 5481
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBIF View Post
"punish" oh the drama....give me a break. No one is talking about taxing the life out of them

The sentence in bold is a joke right ? In the first scenario there is virtually no financial impact on someone's life, in the later case the person starves...
Why the hell would I work 75 hour weeks for 10 years to try to make something out of myself if in the end the extra money I make is going to go to someone else? If the tax rate on the top wage earners was 70%+ again, I would stop putting in any extra effort in my job.

If someone earns the money they have, they should not be punished by having to legally give more of it away. A person's life is their responsibility, and theirs alone. If you make mistakes and end up with a lower paying job, the government is not your mommy who you can run to for help. Pull yourself out of it.

So are you OK with me giving half of your salary to people in Africa living off of $5/day? We should make that a legal mandate, right? Or do you only want to make it legal to take a bigger chunk of OTHER people's money?
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top