Gloominary wrote:Taxing the rich to pay for the poor would likely never affect you, except that it might raise your wages and make society a healthier, smarter, and happier place.
Anyway you slice it, the rest of society will have to, not only pay more tax, but work harder.
Nope. I've been through the numbers on this. Raise taxes on the top, cut taxes on the middle, institute negative tax on the bottom. Most people are better off than before.
But the point I really want to highlight here is that even though my plan involves a taxcut for any class you could ever aspire to inhabit, and raise your wages, and increase the health and education of society, you STILL wouldn't go along with it because the principle has been completely overlooked, which is to make the poor suffer; that's all you care about and that's all the Right cares about. Just like the baby video showed that the kid was willing to take less tokens for himself if it meant the other kid gets even less.
You will make your own life harder just to make the poor suffer.
I want to make things fairer, not differently unfair.
Your definition of fair is who licks the most boots gets the rewards. Ones who refuse to lick boots gets no reward.
We shouldn't tax employees to pay for the voluntarily unemployed, and if employers are paying employees a fair wage, than they shouldn't be taxed either.
"Fair wage" here has the meaning of a wage determined by the most desperate worker underbidding all others.
"Fair wage" here does NOT mean a fair division of the value of the final product. Nor does "fair" mean that the employee agreed to any such divisions, but the terms are "fairly" shoved down his throat.
Some shouldn't have to worker harder to feed, clothe and take care of society because others won't pull their weight.
Yes, get to work licking those boots you feckless maggots!

I don't just want a more equal distribution of money, I want a more equal distribution of work.
Oh goodie... a corner for everyone to stand on.
But you need to punish the lazy.
Yes, how diabolical of me.
Indeed.
Sexual selection is a natural process. There is no one who determined what primitive humans should consider sexy in order to advance the species in the right direction.
Altho genes play a major role in determining us, I'm not a genetic reductionist, our genes are dynamic and help determine our (sub)conscious behavior, and our (sub)conscious behavior, including sexual, is dynamic and helps determine our genes.
Our culture and environment shapes us, but we in turn shape our culture and environment, it's a two way street.
Sure, but who shaped the environment to specifically favor white people? Who said, "We need to rally together to shape our environment to favor the white humanoids. This must be teleological because if left to chance, blacks might become smarter and we can't have that!" Like I said, no one gets any credit.
The only reason whites are being oppressed is that they're uneducated and proud of it.
even liberal whites supposedly have white privilege and are racist, I'm not making this stuff up, believe me I really wish I was, I couldn't even if I tried:
I can't imagine that's prolific.
What has people pissed is the arrogant old white men who think they can, for example, tax tv in order to be fair to corporations. Old white men are being replaced by brown women all across the country because what they lack in brains they more than make up for in having heart and consideration. That's a trade I'd make any day. It's a standing offer: I'll trade 1 redneck for 10 mexicans. All day, every day. Good riddance!
Now, you can shove your head in a hole in refusal to see my point or continue thinking it's irrational white guilt like the video you posted. It really makes no difference to me since I'm just doing you the favor of cluing you in.
I don't feel guilty for slavery, but I can't stand those arrogant codgers thinking everything is common sense. Zero to do with guilt.