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.
sorry. already have diabetes, as well as stage five kidney failure. but ell me, when was the last time any government instituted a tax, and then reduced it?
Canada's Goods and Services Tax went from 7% to 5% in 2006.
sorry. already have diabetes, as well as stage five kidney failure. but ell me, when was the last time any government instituted a tax, and then reduced it? especially when that tax is supposed to help reduce a particular activity? take our federal income tax for instance, when it was created, the top rate was 6%, it went as high as 91% and stayed there for decades before it was reduced to 28%, and then was increased to 40%, which is where it is now. and how about the cigarette tax? it has steadily increased over the years, especially since the bogus lawsuit was settled. so dont talk about slippery slopes when it comes to taxes as you know very well governments like to increase taxes, not reduce them.
This must be why you pretend science isn't real. You fear the imagined consequences of dealing with it, just like that clown who links to tabloids because he thinks liberals want to force him to live in a cave. Well, guess what? Scientific results do not care that right-wingers whine about taxes. Whining doesn't make right-wing garbage true, it just makes the people who spew it whiners as well.
Canada's Goods and Services Tax went from 7% to 5% in 2006.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun
This must be why you pretend science isn't real. You fear the imagined consequences of dealing with it, just like that clown who links to tabloids because he thinks liberals want to force him to live in a cave. Well, guess what? Scientific results do not care that right-wingers whine about taxes. Whining doesn't make right-wing garbage true, it just makes the people who spew it whiners as well.
so we finally hear from fish on a stick again, and more of his tripe. ok so one tax went down in 2006, most go up though. as for science not being real, that is aa huge load of bull crap and you know it. i believe in science, real science, not the tripe that the IPCC is trying to foist on the globe. they are skewing their results to maintain their funding.
so we finally hear from fish on a stick again, and more of his tripe. ok so one tax went down in 2006, most go up though.
You said it never happened. Proving you wrong was easy.
Quote:
as for science not being real, that is aa huge load of bull crap and you know it.
Indeed I do. It's you guys who make up stories about conspiracy theories when facts contradict Republican claims.
Quote:
i believe in science, real science, not the tripe that the IPCC is trying to foist on the globe.
You believe bloggers you like, regardless of their merit. You proved this by linking to a blog written by someone who said "A reader sent this to me and I liked it, so I'll post it."
You said it never happened. Proving you wrong was easy.
i never said it doesnt happen, in fact i pointed out that the US federal went DOWN at one point, but came back up again. nice try but you failed.
Quote:
Indeed I do. It's you guys who make up stories about conspiracy theories when facts contradict Republican claims.
you mean the mad eup facts by the IPCC? yes its true, the IPCC does make up their claims dont they? using computer models to make those claims which cant even be proven for years to come, and those computer models are rather garbage anyway. again more failure on your part.
Quote:
You believe bloggers you like, regardless of their merit. You proved this by linking to a blog written by someone who said "A reader sent this to me and I liked it, so I'll post it."
oh and you dont believe bloggers? you link to blogs as well, but you suggest that they are using real science, where as skeptic bloggers are not. but the reality is that you still link to bloggers, as well. which means you are practicing hypocrisy in accepting the word of bloggers that fit your point of view, but rejecting bloggers that dont. again more failure on your part.
Not necessarily. Why should I? Anyone can write anything they want in a blog. What kind of scientific reference is that?
Quote:
you link to blogs as well, but you suggest that they are using real science, where as skeptic bloggers are not.
It's not something I suggest, it's just the way it is.
Quote:
but the reality is that you still link to bloggers, as well. which means you are practicing hypocrisy in accepting the word of bloggers that fit your point of view, but rejecting bloggers that dont. again more failure on your part.
No, I base it on the scientific validity of their sources. I haven't failed anything, you just don't like me because I know the difference between scientific publications and what you guys produce.
Consensus is not a valid argument; even if every single scientist or even every single person on Earth believes something, that does not make it true. Truth is derived from reasoning constrained by observing nature and making falsifiable predictions. Using this standard instead of logically fallacious consensus ones, the AGW predictions from the computer models aren't looking too good versus reality; that's a big reason why the 20-year temperature stagnation is bugging quite a few scientists. As for it being a conspiracy, being wrong requires no conspiracy; the consensus that the sun revolved around the earth wasn't a conspiracy.
The thing is, that it is the scientists that have the evidence...The evidence that can now be measured, belief has nothing to do with it.
so we finally hear from fish on a stick again, and more of his tripe. ok so one tax went down in 2006, most go up though. as for science not being real, that is aa huge load of bull crap and you know it. i believe in science, real science, not the tripe that the IPCC is trying to foist on the globe. they are skewing their results to maintain their funding.
I doubt that you believe in science at all, and your conspiracy theory is a myth of global proportions...... Our income tax has decreased in BC because......Wait for it......In 2008 the province instituted a carbon tax, and all revenue from this tax is returned to people of the province by reducing their income taxes.
I doubt that you believe in science at all, and your conspiracy theory is a myth of global proportions...... Our income tax has decreased in BC because......Wait for it......In 2008 the province instituted a carbon tax, and all revenue from this tax is returned to people of the province by reducing their income taxes.
you have no clue as to what i believe. i can say the same thing about you, that you dont believe in science, and it wouldnt necessarily be true either. you and fish on a stick have yet to provide any proof of your claims that global warming is man made, all you are showing is anecdotal evidence, and sorry but that isnt good enough. you and the alarmists are trying to use cause and effect based on computer models that are designed around evidence they accept, and ignore evidence the reject. and then you use these computer models to try and get regulations put in, in a few countries that happen to be the richest ones on the world, but somehow exempt china and india from these regulations. these countries might be deciding to change their ways on the own, but not because of global warming, more like because they want to increase their tourism dollars, and that wont happen unless they clean up their acts. so stop trying to assign some kind of nobility to what the IPCC wants, and what the UN wants, because its all about the money in the end, whether you want to believe it or not.
as i have always said, follow the money. check to see where it comes from, and where it really goes. if you think that the money that gets sent to third world countries goes to helping the environment and the people, you are sadly mistaken. the leader of these countries put it in their bank accounts for when they decide to step down as the leader of the country, so they can live in luxury in the south of france, or in monaco, or other place of prestige and luxury.
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 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.
