Came here hoping for another dead Tory.
Left disappointed.
Came here hoping for another dead Tory.
Left disappointed.
Originally Posted by Bob Loblaw
Letters Out!
Know your enemy.
http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...-haven-bermuda
You pay around 40-50% in tax when the myriad of picket dipping sanctions against the British public is added up, a lot of it being tax on taxed income. That in itself is an unimaginable scandal but flies because for whatever reasons the British people won't stick up for themselves and their families.
In a lawful world Google wouldn't have to pay tax at all and neither would we. Tax is straightforward theft, just because the thief has control of the law book doesn't mean the crime hasn't occurred. But, if the majority produced by the immorality of democracy is content with complacency and cowardice then the immorality and the crime should at least be applied evenly under the same principles enforced by wicked democracy. So why are the rich paying a fraction of what the poor are expected to pay?
I wonder how much longer this will be allowed to stand. Will the human species ever mature?
Für eure Sicherheit
Your first instinct is to laugh and then resort to personal abuse when it should be to think.
If you take a thing owned by another without their consent then it is theft, there is no getting around that fundamental fact. If you want to create a law that states theft is not theft in some cases then okay, but you end up with contradictory laws on the books. When that happens, and the law loses equity, then it fails to be the law. Either you legalise theft or you make it unlawful, but whatever you decide must apply evenly to all under the jurisdiction or else it is not law. I suppose you could say the government is not under the jurisdiction of the legal system in the UK. If that's the case then it becomes clear who the Nazi is.
Of course not a problem at all if there is consent.
To answer your question, The NHS, education (so to speak) and helping the disabled is paid for by loans taken from private corporations at interest. The tax revenue stolen from the population is the guarantee. This is where our debt based, compounding interest driven economy originates and it is why we have eye watering inequality. Instead of stealing from the people the government could operate under the law and provide state based, consent based alternatives to private services. Then I, for example, would be able to choose whether I pay for the NHS or take up a private healthcare plan. I should not have to pay twice if I choose the latter. Similarly I could choose public education or private but as things stand money is stolen from me to fund the public monopoly regardless of my choice. This is, by definition, a criminal act.
I would be happy to set aside a fair percentage of my labour to voluntarily assist those in need. However, I am naturally against having the proceeds of my labour stolen and then wasted by the criminal entity in Westminster. This seems sane and rational to me. Who wants to be robbed? Large sections of the British public apparently. Well that's where consent come into play. If you want to be robbed I have no objection. But don't rob me and then call me a fascist because I tell you openly what you have just done.
Für eure Sicherheit
From the other day, you said "With all undue respect, all of the above is bullshit. Just verbatim shit from the archives of the science worshippers manual."
Sounds like personal abuse to me.
To which I'll answer, your first instinct is to regurgitate shite from the mainstream when it should be to have your own opinions based on knowledge.
But, I accept, I did the personal abuse thing myself. Fair point. I get very, very irritated when I hear the mainstream view being parroted without thought for the horrendous consequences. I wasn't saying science is bad, btw. I was saying we should go back to it because it served us well in the past and is a lot better than the shit that replaced it.
Für eure Sicherheit
I don't do mainstream as such. If what I think is not mainstream, I don't stop thinking it for that reason. Similarly, if what I think happens to coincide with mainstream, I don't stop thinking it either. Sometimes mainstream is correct, sometimes it is not.
I know a lot of people in the science world who do proper peer-reviewed work and I do not like seeing their genuine effort criticised in that way. I fully accept that there are people doing scientific work sponsored by large corporations and others with a desire to see the 'right' result and who do not publish results and data that do not help their cause. However, to tarnish all scientists with that brush is an insult to the majority of scientists and researchers who are trying to do an honest and open effort to advance the knowledge of mankind.
For example. Genuinely interested to hear about scientists doing proper peer reviewed science beneficial to mankind.
Für eure Sicherheit
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote