It's Really Bad Now.

[StoneByStone]

You'll notice that all of the countries in which things like socialized medicine are implemented don't just tax the rich more. They tax everyone more. They also tend to tax corporations less.

That should clue progressives in that putting more of the tax burden on the wealthy isn't a logical means to reach the government programs they desire.

The reason why taxing the wealthy is so heavily emphasized is because it's easy to sell to the masses. If the masses actually understood that having more government programs meant more taxation of themselves, they'd be less supportive of the idea.

They tax everyone more, but the working-class ends up with a bigger savings than in America because of social programs. Now that is a harder sell. If you say "I'm going to tax you more, but you'll end up with more money," most Americans will only hear "I'm going to tax you more." But the majority of the taxation does go to the rich in Social Democrat countries and I think as long as the working-class ends up with a bigger savings, there's nothing extremist about that. People are still getting healthcare and it's mostly being paid for by the rich.

I could defend myself with a knife or a sword as well, but that doesn't mean I want to limit my options or the options of others.

Not everyone could defend themselves with a sword, but pretty much anyone can pull a trigger.

Taken to its logical conclusion, the trans agenda results in hormone blockers being used on children. In certain areas, we've already seen the state demand that a willing child be allowed to use them if he/she identifies as trans. Thankfully, this is not a common thing in America, but it has happened in parts of Europe. And the idea is gaining traction among the left here.

In the affected jurisdictions, they consider it child abuse by a parent to withhold said treatment from a child. And when I say child, I mean prepubescent children. These children aren't old enough to understand gender identity. It's complex enough to make it hard for adults to understand.

Any examples of this?

The best way to really know if an idea is common is to see if the idea is being promoted among politicians or pundits with considerable support. As far as I know, there aren't any mainstream Leftists who think hormone blockers should be used on kids under 18.

 

[Into the Night]

Yeah, the rich hide money, but it's not extremist to say we're going to tax them way more and actually hold them accountable when we catch them hiding money.

It's not illegal to hide money.

The problem is that right now we have a system that protects the rich.

Nope. Nothing protects the rich. Not even the police.

If we had a president like Bernie Sanders, who clearly gives no fucks about the rich and their bribes, we could change things.

Bernie Sanders is a thief. He wants to steal from the rich. He wants to steal from you too.

When you consider that you could defend yourself with a basic handgun, it doesn't seem so extreme to ban other kinds of guns.

Yes it is. You don't get to change the Constitution.

What exactly is the trans insanity? Letting them use the bathrooms they want? Why does anyone care about this?

Since you have to ask this, I guess you never learned about gender.

 

[Into the Night]

They tax everyone more, but the working-class ends up with a bigger savings than in America because of social programs.

Taxation is not savings.

Now that is a harder sell.

Because taxation is not savings.

If you say "I'm going to tax you more, but you'll end up with more money," most Americans will only hear "I'm going to tax you more."

Taxation is not savings.

But the majority of the taxation does go to the rich in Social Democrat countries

There are no democracies anywhere in the world today. The United States is organized as a federated republic.

and I think as long as the working-class ends up with a bigger savings,

Taxation is not savings.

there's nothing extremist about that.

Yes there is. Redefinition fallacy.

People are still getting healthcare and it's mostly being paid for by the rich.

Government 'healthcare' is not healthcare.

Not everyone could defend themselves with a sword, but pretty much anyone can pull a trigger.

You don't get to change the Constitution.

 

[Saudade]

They tax everyone more, but the working-class ends up with a bigger savings than in America because of social programs. Now that is a harder sell. If you say "I'm going to tax you more, but you'll end up with more money," most Americans will only hear "I'm going to tax you more." But the majority of the taxation does go to the rich in Social Democrat countries and I think as long as the working-class ends up with a bigger savings, there's nothing extremist about that. People are still getting healthcare and it's mostly being paid for by the rich.

The bolded is debatable. Proportionate to the individual, the rich pay more, but the majority of the funding for these systems comes from the general populace, not specifically the rich. That's the reason why it's deceptive for the Democrats to sell socialized medicine under the guise of just taxing the wealthy more.

Not everyone could defend themselves with a sword, but pretty much anyone can pull a trigger.

Sure, but similarly, trying to defend yourself with a bolt action pistol is hard if the criminal you face is using a semiauto pistol.

Any examples of this?

The best way to really know if an idea is common is to see if the idea is being promoted among politicians or pundits with considerable support. As far as I know, there aren't any mainstream Leftists who think hormone blockers should be used on kids under 18.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444866417301101

The above is a good summary of how gender clinics operate in Europe. The fact that youth referrals to said clinics have increased so dramatically in recent years suggests that the idea is becoming mainstream over there. Typically, the referrals involve children that have just entered puberty.

 

[CFM]

I love watching you embarrass yourself.

You spend zero time doing it.

 

[Walt]

It's not illegal to hide money.

As a general rule, it is almost always illegal to hide money from the IRS. Even if you could not possibly owe taxes on the money, the IRS wants to know about it. There are always exceptions, but the IRS is actively trying to find and eliminate those exceptions.

Depending on how you hide money, it breaks different laws, but as a general rule, hiding money bad.

 

[RB 60]

The stuff relating to ICE and illegal immigration, I agree is extremist. But that's pretty much it.
Yeah, the rich hide money, but it's not extremist to say we're going to tax them way more and actually hold them accountable when we catch them hiding money. The problem is that right now we have a system that protects the rich. If we had a president like Bernie Sanders, who clearly gives no fucks about the rich and their bribes, we could change things.
When you consider that you could defend yourself with a basic handgun, it doesn't seem so extreme to ban other kinds of guns.
What exactly is the trans insanity? Letting them use the bathrooms they want? Why does anyone care about this?

What is "extremism" by removing the illegal aliens who are a burden (and breaking the law) in our country? Should we just let them run free? Open our borders to everyone?

Bernie is a socialist, he will never become president. But if he did, what makes you think he'd change what's already making him rich?

AGAIN, I ask! What guns should be banned? Should the government come and (try to) take them from those of us who own them? How would you remove them?

Would you allow one of those perverted transvestites in the same bathroom as your 12 year old daughter? I sure wouldn't, ain't no chance.

 

[Cancel 2020.2]

Elections are not a "overthrow" of the government and never were. Thinking like this is the height of stupidity.

Well, Nifty IS highly stupid...........

 

[StoneByStone]

What is "extremism" by removing the illegal aliens who are a burden (and breaking the law) in our country? Should we just let them run free? Open our borders to everyone?

Which is why I said that I agree that part is extremism.

Bernie is a socialist, he will never become president. But if he did, what makes you think he'd change what's already making him rich?

Do you know what Socialism is?
Some people care about things other than money. I don't know if Bernie really is that kind of person, but if he wins, we'll find out.

AGAIN, I ask! What guns should be banned? Should the government come and (try to) take them from those of us who own them? How would you remove them?

AGAIN? Did you ask me before?
I'm less concerned about guns and more concerned about gun features. I think magazines that hold more than six bullets should be banned. Bump stocks should certainly be banned. We should also have a better screening process, since so many deranged people own guns today.
I think anyone who already has these things should be allowed to keep them, since I don't like the idea of the government going around searching people's houses. But stores should be banned from continuing to sell them.

Would you allow one of those perverted transvestites in the same bathroom as your 12 year old daughter? I sure wouldn't, ain't no chance.

Would you allow a grown man in the same bathroom as your 12 year old son?
Personally, I don't think parents should let their small children go into a public bathroom alone. It has nothing to do with gender or sexuality, though.

 

[StoneByStone]

The bolded is debatable. Proportionate to the individual, the rich pay more, but the majority of the funding for these systems comes from the general populace, not specifically the rich. That's the reason why it's deceptive for the Democrats to sell socialized medicine under the guise of just taxing the wealthy more.

Technically yes, because the working-class make up a much larger percentage. But because the rich pay much higher taxes, the working-class is still getting the savings.
I totally agree it's deceptive, but like I said, the average person is too stupid to understand that paying slightly more in taxes for universal healthcare would benefit them by saving more money. This is part of why I think there should be IQ tests for voting eligibility.

Sure, but similarly, trying to defend yourself with a bolt action pistol is hard if the criminal you face is using a semiauto pistol.

I'm pretty sure at that point, it would be about the same. Shoot a guy with a machine gun or a musket, and you have more than enough time to call the cops while he's on the ground.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444866417301101

The above is a good summary of how gender clinics operate in Europe. The fact that youth referrals to said clinics have increased so dramatically in recent years suggests that the idea is becoming mainstream over there. Typically, the referrals involve children that have just entered puberty.

So I'm very on the fence about puberty blockers. As of now, the science shows that puberty blockers don't do any long-term damage. So while it should be a last resort kind of thing, using them on kids who really do have gender dysphoria isn't really extremist. It's not like surgery, which is practically irreversible. Still not sure it should be legal or not, though.

 

[Into the Night]

As a general rule, it is almost always illegal to hide money from the IRS.

Not a bit of it, so long as the taxes are paid.

Even if you could not possibly owe taxes on the money, the IRS wants to know about it.

They don't have the right to know about any money other than income generated in the United States.

There are always exceptions, but the IRS is actively trying to find and eliminate those exceptions.

Void argument fallacy.

Depending on how you hide money, it breaks different laws, but as a general rule, hiding money bad.

Nope. Not illegal to hide money.

Redefinition fallacy (money<->income).

 

[Into the Night]

Which is why I said that I agree that part is extremism.

Yet you support those that want illegal aliens to run free and to freely cross our border.

Do you know what Socialism is?

Yes. Theft of wealth by government for 'redistribution' according to arbitrary methods determined by that government. It comes in two major forms: fascism, where the government controls the operation of privately own companies, and communism where government owns the companies outright.

Some people care about things other than money. I don't know if Bernie really is that kind of person, but if he wins, we'll find out.

Bernie is a communist. Money isn't wealth. Redefinition fallacy.

AGAIN? Did you ask me before?

Yes, he did. You never answered. I will take the following as your 'answer'.

I'm less concerned about guns and more concerned about gun features.

Who are YOU to decide what should be and should not be allowed as a gun feature? You are not the king. The 2nd amendment does not list any gun feature, therefore the government has no power to decide them.

I think magazines that hold more than six bullets should be banned.

YOU don't get to change the Constitution. YOU don't get to arbitrarily decide N bullets are 'enough'. You are not the king.

Bump stocks should certainly be banned.

YOU don't get to decide if bumpstocks can be banned. You are not the king. The 2nd amendment does not list any feature of any gun, therefore the government has no authority over them. Besides a fat belly can act as a bumpstock. Are you going to ban fat people?

We should also have a better screening process, since so many deranged people own guns today.

Define 'deranged people'. Do you seriously think criminals are going to bother going through the screening process? They're CRIMINALS, dumbass. These are the people that go into 'gun free zones' and shoot the place up!

I think anyone who already has these things should be allowed to keep them,

So you have no problem with the organized crime keeping their machine guns, or with thugs on the street packing one in their pants, eh?

since I don't like the idea of the government going around searching people's houses.

Yet you supportthose who want to do exactly that.

But stores should be banned from continuing to sell them.

Who are YOU to decide what business should be allowed to exist? You are not the king.

Would you allow a grown man in the same bathroom as your 12 year old son?
Personally, I don't think parents should let their small children go into a public bathroom alone. It has nothing to do with gender or sexuality, though.

So you think a father should accompany his 12 year old daughter into the women's restroom??? It DOES have to do with gender, dumbass.

 

[Into the Night]

Technically yes, because the working-class make up a much larger percentage. But because the rich pay much higher taxes, the working-class is still getting the savings.

Taxes are not savings. Redefinition fallacy.

I totally agree it's deceptive, but like I said, the average person is too stupid to understand that paying slightly more in taxes for universal healthcare would benefit them by saving more money.

Fascism isn't savings. Redefinition fallacy.

This is part of why I think there should be IQ tests for voting eligibility.

YOU don't get to choose an arbitrary meaningless number to determine voting eligibility. You are not the king.

re: bolt action vs semi-auto: I'm pretty sure at that point, it would be about the same.

Nope. They are different actions, for different purposes, with different advantages and disadvantages about each of them.

Shoot a guy with a machine gun or a musket, and you have more than enough time to call the cops while he's on the ground.

Contextomy fallacy. Context is about an opposing shooter, not how long it takes to call the cops. Try to at least stay on topic.

So I'm very on the fence about puberty blockers. As of now, the science shows that puberty blockers don't do any long-term damage.

No such science. Science doesn't 'show' anything. There are no proofs in science. Science is a set of theories. They must be falsifiable.

So while it should be a last resort kind of thing, using them on kids who really do have gender dysphoria isn't really extremist.

Forcing any drug into anyone is extremist.

It's not like surgery, which is practically irreversible. Still not sure it should be legal or not, though.

It isn't.

 

[Saudade]

Technically yes, because the working-class make up a much larger percentage. But because the rich pay much higher taxes, the working-class is still getting the savings.
I totally agree it's deceptive, but like I said, the average person is too stupid to understand that paying slightly more in taxes for universal healthcare would benefit them by saving more money. This is part of why I think there should be IQ tests for voting eligibility.

That would depend on a lot of things, actually. Universal healthcare would benefit unhealthy people the most. Healthy people would not realize as much in savings.

Also, we have to consider the current state of the government. In most countries that have socialized medicine, the government spends the bulk of its budget on healthcare. With the American government, money is spent on a lot of things, not the least of which is the military. Since we currently have the world's largest military and function as the world's police (to an extent), that means that adding universal healthcare to the budget would increase public debt even more than our current spending does.

The optimal situation for implementing universal healthcare would require reducing spending dramatically on other things, like the military. It would also help if we reduced welfare spending. Otherwise, the necessary tax increases would have to be pretty huge for the average person, short of increasing public debt by several magnitudes.

I'm pretty sure at that point, it would be about the same. Shoot a guy with a machine gun or a musket, and you have more than enough time to call the cops while he's on the ground.

That's assuming you hit with the first shot. The guy with the semiauto doesn't have to reload after each shot, unlike a person with a bolt action.

So I'm very on the fence about puberty blockers. As of now, the science shows that puberty blockers don't do any long-term damage. So while it should be a last resort kind of thing, using them on kids who really do have gender dysphoria isn't really extremist. It's not like surgery, which is practically irreversible. Still not sure it should be legal or not, though.

The bolded is highly debatable. No significant long term studies have been done yet. However, we do know that drugs often used as puberty blockers have been shown to have adverse effects. Lupron is a good example of one of them.

https://www.ajc.com/lifestyles/heal...g-for-pain-sues-maker/SXiOzDSFL694I7LcT4Ra0O/

 

[Walt]

Not a bit of it, so long as the taxes are paid.

Actually, just the opposite. In general, not paying taxes is not a crime. Not reporting income and money is a crime. You can fill out your tax form, but not send any money, and they will almost never arrest you. They will grab your possessions, but not arrest you. If you hide money, even money you did not owe money on, you are very likely to go to prison.

They don't have the right to know about any money other than income generated in the United States.

Now that is a line you do not want to cross. The US Government often taxes money generated outside the USA, but almost always demands to know about it. It is a felony to fail to report foreign accounts. You will spend years in prison.

 

[StoneByStone]

That would depend on a lot of things, actually. Universal healthcare would benefit unhealthy people the most. Healthy people would not realize as much in savings.

Also, we have to consider the current state of the government. In most countries that have socialized medicine, the government spends the bulk of its budget on healthcare. With the American government, money is spent on a lot of things, not the least of which is the military. Since we currently have the world's largest military and function as the world's police (to an extent), that means that adding universal healthcare to the budget would increase public debt even more than our current spending does.

The optimal situation for implementing universal healthcare would require reducing spending dramatically on other things, like the military. It would also help if we reduced welfare spending. Otherwise, the necessary tax increases would have to be pretty huge for the average person, short of increasing public debt by several magnitudes.

Eventually we all age and healthcare becomes a bigger part of our lives. So yeah, in a person's younger years, it might not seem as necessarily, but it will be eventually. And part of living in a society is paying for things we don't directly use. If you don't have a car, you still pay for roads and bridges. If you don't have kids, you still pay for schools. But no matter your situation, you still benefit from these things.

Which is yet another reason we should stop being the world's police, fighting endless wars for Israel, and wasting so much money on the military industrial complex.
By the way, one of the reasons the Right and even many Centrists are against universal healthcare is because they want to keep funding the military the way we are now. They also want to keep people poor, since that drives enlistment.

That's assuming you hit with the first shot. The guy with the semiauto doesn't have to reload after each shot, unlike a person with a bolt action.

Which is why a standard handgun would be the most fair compromise. You can't hit a guy with six tries, well that's just natural selection.

The bolded is highly debatable. No significant long term studies have been done yet. However, we do know that drugs often used as puberty blockers have been shown to have adverse effects. Lupron is a good example of one of them.

Yeah, since this is fairly new, we're still learning about it.
The link you included seems to be a special case, as the woman took it because she got her period early, which is very rare. To say it shouldn't be given to kids with gender dysphoria, we'd have to consider a lot of other factors, like how much is used, what role did this woman's unique genetics play, and so on.

 

[Into the Night]

Actually, just the opposite. In general, not paying taxes is not a crime.

Not paying taxes is a crime, idiot.

Not reporting income and money is a crime.

Not reporting income is a crime. Not reporting money is not a crime.

You can fill out your tax form, but not send any money, and they will almost never arrest you.

They will come and take your property, charge you extra fees, and possibly arrest you. That is the penalty for committing the crime.

They will grab your possessions, but not arrest you.

They can arrest you.

If you hide money, even money you did not owe money on, you are very likely to go to prison.

Nope. Not a crime to hide money.

Now that is a line you do not want to cross.

No line. It is not a crime to hide money.

The US Government often taxes money generated outside the USA,

Not allowed to. They have no claim to income generated in other nations. That's the business of other nations. The United States does not own the revenue due other nations!

but almost always demands to know about it.

Nope. They don't care about it. You can report it to clarify your return, but that's all it does.

It is a felony to fail to report foreign accounts.

Nope. Not a felony at all. Not a crime.

You will spend years in prison.

Nope. Not a crime to hide money.

 

[Walt]

Into The Night, good luck with breaking the law about filing a FinCEN Form 114

 

[Into the Night]

Eventually we all age and healthcare becomes a bigger part of our lives. So yeah, in a person's younger years, it might not seem as necessarily, but it will be eventually. And part of living in a society is paying for things we don't directly use. If you don't have a car, you still pay for roads and bridges. If you don't have kids, you still pay for schools. But no matter your situation, you still benefit from these things.

How does a retiree benefit from funding schools?
He doesn't have to have a car to use roads and bridges.

Which is yet another reason we should stop being the world's police,

We aren't. We do go afar to fight wars so we don't have to fight them here though.

fighting endless wars for Israel,

We are not fighting wars for Israel. Israel can take care itself pretty well, thank you, thanks to our treaty with them.

and wasting so much money on the military industrial complex.

War is a necessary evil. Do you think not having a military to defend the United States is really a good idea??? Do you think fighting wars abroad is better than fighting them here on our own soil?

By the way, one of the reasons the Right and even many Centrists are against universal healthcare is because they want to keep funding the military the way we are now.

WRONG. Universal 'healthcare' is an oligarchy. It is fascism. That's reason enough.

They also want to keep people poor,

The only ones that want to keep people poor are the Democrats. They do it to maintain power over them. Capitalism does not keep people poor. Capitalism creates wealth. Anyone can play.

since that drives enlistment.

The military does not enlist just anyone. There is no draft either.

Which is why a standard handgun would be the most fair compromise. You can't hit a guy with six tries, well that's just natural selection.

YOU don't get to dictate how many shells a gun may have in it's magazine. YOU don't get to dictate what an 'appropriate' weapon is. You are not the king.

 

[Into the Night]

Into The Night, good luck with breaking the law about filing a FinCEN Form 114

Who says I'm hiding money in a foreign account?