[QUOTE="curono"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the the expense of? what is just is subjective and what is unjust is tyrannical, if he does not feel he should be forced to pay for others things and is, the entity forcing is imposing tyranny on him.surrealnumber5No. In that sense every government is by default tyrannical, since you can't choose exactly what your tax will be used for, decisions are made by politics and which laws you want to be enforced to you. Part of the social contract (base of almost every social group), is allowing a group to enforce decisions and laws. And by going to your crazy standards, every social group is by nature tyrannical. Tyranny goes to other lines, dont try to slap it like a sticker. i am using the word as it is defined, as it is to be used, i do not want to get into an argument about diction. your thoughts on that word are wrong, you may find another word that fits your argument. tyranny is subject to the will of the individuals being imposed on. LEARN WHAT TYRANNY REALLY IS DICTIONARY.COM arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. undue severity or harshness. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people as well as others OXFORD 1 a cruel and oppressive ruler. a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way: You should learn what things really are before going into a debate. Every government imposes its will to all individuals. You can't have a government which cant impose its will. How that will is defined or distributed is a different thing, but there can be no government that is not MENT to subject its will as a government. If the will was to be broken or ignored you would have uprising coups and civil rebellion.
Why americans are so paranoid towards socialism??
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="curono"] No. In that sense every government is by default tyrannical, since you can't choose exactly what your tax will be used for, decisions are made by politics and which laws you want to be enforced to you. Part of the social contract (base of almost every social group), is allowing a group to enforce decisions and laws. And by going to your crazy standards, every social group is by nature tyrannical. Tyranny goes to other lines, dont try to slap it like a sticker.curonoi am using the word as it is defined, as it is to be used, i do not want to get into an argument about diction. your thoughts on that word are wrong, you may find another word that fits your argument. tyranny is subject to the will of the individuals being imposed on. LEARN WHAT TYRANNY REALLY IS DICTIONARY.COM arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. undue severity or harshness. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people as well as others OXFORD 1 a cruel and oppressive ruler. a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way: You should learn what things really are before going into a debate. Every government imposes its will to all individuals. You can't have a government which cant impose its will. How that will is defined or distributed is a different thing, but there can be no government that is not MENT to subject its will as a government. If the will was to be broken or ignored you would have uprising coups and civil rebellion.every one of those definitions agree with me.... and just so you know both democracies and republics are made so the government takes actions reflecting the will of the people, not the other way around, in these systems as well as any other if the people in mass feel oppressed by a tyrant their will will overthrow the government, not the other way around. the government imposing its will the will of a ruling class does not bring stability as you just said. again, the population defines what is tyrannical and what is not, not the rulers imposing the power.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the the expense of? what is just is subjective and what is unjust is tyrannical, if he does not feel he should be forced to pay for others things and is, the entity forcing is imposing tyranny on him.surrealnumber5
If we go to both ends we can get tyranny in two different ways.. The best way has always been striking a fine balance between the two.. That is why if we look through out the world the most prosperous nations strike up this balance of grey.
only force and abuse of power can be called tyrannical, you can come up with another name for the other end unless you believe a dictatorship of the proletariat could form, but unless there is power and force there is no tyranny Can you not consider limiting an individual's choices to the point where he/she has only one to be force and abuse? Capitalism is quickly dwindling down most markets into a handful of multi-national corporations. The greatest "choice" that millions of Americans get to make is which poverty-level job they will work at. Being part of a society, means that you will inevitably have things forced on you, so I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]
If we go to both ends we can get tyranny in two different ways.. The best way has always been striking a fine balance between the two.. That is why if we look through out the world the most prosperous nations strike up this balance of grey.
only force and abuse of power can be called tyrannical, you can come up with another name for the other end unless you believe a dictatorship of the proletariat could form, but unless there is power and force there is no tyranny Can you not consider limiting an individual's choices to the point where he/she has only one to be force and abuse? Capitalism is quickly dwindling down most markets into a handful of multi-national corporations. The greatest "choice" that millions of Americans get to make is which poverty-level job they will work at. Being part of a society, means that you will inevitably have things forced on you, so I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society. the corporatist system will end in only a handful of state sanctioned agents, this is why i support a free market where agents may enter and competition will run crazy. i do not defend the current system as it is rotten to the core, and is filled with political favor and artificial barriers. your case is covered in the Marxian theory of a "dictatorship of the proletariat"
I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on?EntropyWins
[QUOTE="EntropyWins"]I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.
So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on? i see where this is going, and it will end with an argument along the lines of "rights are not black and white, all or not, stop being a ideologue this is where the line should be drawn because i think so"So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on?[QUOTE="EntropyWins"]I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.
aransom
Well that's what's so good about liberalism, the marriage of utilitarianistic democracy, held in check by individual rights :)
So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on? Well, mine starts with D so....[QUOTE="EntropyWins"]I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.
aransom
but seriously, obviously people should have protection from a majority, but at the end of the day, the act of declaring that everyone has certain rights only has power if society backs it up and enforces those rights, they can be taken away if society decides to. Just look at what the US has been doing for the last decade...
[QUOTE="curono"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i am using the word as it is defined, as it is to be used, i do not want to get into an argument about diction. your thoughts on that word are wrong, you may find another word that fits your argument. tyranny is subject to the will of the individuals being imposed on. surrealnumber5LEARN WHAT TYRANNY REALLY IS DICTIONARY.COM arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. undue severity or harshness. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people as well as others OXFORD 1 a cruel and oppressive ruler. a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way: You should learn what things really are before going into a debate. Every government imposes its will to all individuals. You can't have a government which cant impose its will. How that will is defined or distributed is a different thing, but there can be no government that is not MENT to subject its will as a government. If the will was to be broken or ignored you would have uprising coups and civil rebellion.every one of those definitions agree with me.... and just so you know both democracies and republics are made so the government takes actions reflecting the will of the people, not the other way around, in these systems as well as any other if the people in mass feel oppressed by a tyrant their will will overthrow the government, not the other way around. the government imposing its will the will of a ruling class does not bring stability as you just said. again, the population defines what is tyrannical and what is not, not the rulers imposing the power. As I said before, where does the government's will come and how will it take effect is a different thing. You can have a democratic government (even with poll guided actions) and still have a lot of action. Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained. AND GOVERNMENT ALWAYS SUBJECTS IST WILL I dare you to name me a place where a running government does not subject its will (which may come from the people, but as long as it becomes the government's voice and action becomes its will) upon all population.
What is wrong with a country or a group of people not agreeing to socialist ideals? I don't really see the problem. And please link to anyone saying reducing the income gap is anti-america.limpbizkit818Forcing taxes on the rich JUST to try and bring down the gap is anti-American and not capitalist. You can't tax a class for no reason.
[QUOTE="aransom"]
[QUOTE="EntropyWins"]I don't see the problem with deciding as a society what is best for the society.
So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on?Well that's what's so good about liberalism, the marriage of utilitarianistic democracy, held in check by individual rights :)
is it checked by individual rights? It is arguable that the right to property is the most important right there is, and it can also be argued that taxes and fiduciary mandates impose on this right to whatever extent the imposition is up to the amount of collections. this is only one of many views but does go against the progressive view, i cant use liberalism in the same way you do as i consider my self a classical liberal[QUOTE="limpbizkit818"]What is wrong with a country or a group of people not agreeing to socialist ideals? I don't really see the problem. And please link to anyone saying reducing the income gap is anti-america.SF_KiLLaMaNForcing taxes on the rich JUST to try and bring down the gap is anti-American and not capitalist. You can't tax a class for no reason. Higher income groups already pay more in taxes than lower ones. This has been in practice for a long time in America and is not anti-American or anti-capitalist. Again, I want the TC to prove that talking about reducing the income gap leads to people screaming "ANTIAMERICAN". I have never seen such a thing. Also, there are other ways to reduce the gap besides raising taxes, something which simply redistributes income. You're not really fixing the problem.
[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"][QUOTE="aransom"]So if we held a vote and society decided it's best for society to round up everyone who's last name begins with N, and send them to the gas chamber, you'd be fine with it? Or do individuals have rights that society shouldn't be able to infringe on?
surrealnumber5
Well that's what's so good about liberalism, the marriage of utilitarianistic democracy, held in check by individual rights :)
is it checked by individual rights? It is arguable that the right to property is the most important right there is, and it can also be argued that taxes and fiduciary mandates impose on this right to whatever extent the imposition is up to the amount of collections. this is only one of many views but does go against the progressive view, i cant use liberalism in the same way you do as i consider my self a classical liberalWell I was referring to liberalism in the broad, classical sense. Though I personally feel the current progressive liberal movement, while somewhat left leaning isn't as different from its origins as some people say.
[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="curono"] LEARN WHAT TYRANNY REALLY IS DICTIONARY.COM arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. undue severity or harshness. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE "one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people as well as others OXFORD 1 a cruel and oppressive ruler. a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way: You should learn what things really are before going into a debate. Every government imposes its will to all individuals. You can't have a government which cant impose its will. How that will is defined or distributed is a different thing, but there can be no government that is not MENT to subject its will as a government. If the will was to be broken or ignored you would have uprising coups and civil rebellion.curonoevery one of those definitions agree with me.... and just so you know both democracies and republics are made so the government takes actions reflecting the will of the people, not the other way around, in these systems as well as any other if the people in mass feel oppressed by a tyrant their will will overthrow the government, not the other way around. the government imposing its will the will of a ruling class does not bring stability as you just said. again, the population defines what is tyrannical and what is not, not the rulers imposing the power. As I said before, where does the government's will come and how will it take effect is a different thing. You can have a democratic government (even with poll guided actions) and still have a lot of action. Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained. AND GOVERNMENT ALWAYS SUBJECTS IST WILL I dare you to name me a place where a running government does not subject its will (which may come from the people, but as long as it becomes the government's voice and action becomes its will) upon all population. what the government mandates it is only followed by the will of the people if the people in large feel it unjust they will revoke the power of the government to govern. all powers come from the people, not the government, a representative government is made so the people have more of a say and the people allow the government to govern, creating a stable state. "Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained." again the people decide if they are being oppressed and if the government is acting beyond its restraints, it is up to every individual in the population to make these judgments and only one who has been granted power can use it, this goes back to the government being granted its powers by the people.
[QUOTE="curono"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]every one of those definitions agree with me.... and just so you know both democracies and republics are made so the government takes actions reflecting the will of the people, not the other way around, in these systems as well as any other if the people in mass feel oppressed by a tyrant their will will overthrow the government, not the other way around. the government imposing its will the will of a ruling class does not bring stability as you just said. again, the population defines what is tyrannical and what is not, not the rulers imposing the power.surrealnumber5As I said before, where does the government's will come and how will it take effect is a different thing. You can have a democratic government (even with poll guided actions) and still have a lot of action. Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained. AND GOVERNMENT ALWAYS SUBJECTS IST WILL I dare you to name me a place where a running government does not subject its will (which may come from the people, but as long as it becomes the government's voice and action becomes its will) upon all population. what the government mandates it is only followed by the will of the people if the people in large feel it unjust they will revoke the power of the government to govern. all powers come from the people, not the government, a representative government is made so the people have more of a say and the people allow the government to govern, creating a stable state. "Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained." again the people decide if they are being oppressed and if the government is acting beyond its restraints, it is up to every individual in the population to make these judgments and only one who has been granted power can use it, this goes back to the government being granted its powers by the people. Again I dare you to tell me ONE running government that does not subject its will to the people it governs...
[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="curono"] As I said before, where does the government's will come and how will it take effect is a different thing. You can have a democratic government (even with poll guided actions) and still have a lot of action. Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained. AND GOVERNMENT ALWAYS SUBJECTS IST WILL I dare you to name me a place where a running government does not subject its will (which may come from the people, but as long as it becomes the government's voice and action becomes its will) upon all population.curonowhat the government mandates it is only followed by the will of the people if the people in large feel it unjust they will revoke the power of the government to govern. all powers come from the people, not the government, a representative government is made so the people have more of a say and the people allow the government to govern, creating a stable state. "Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained." again the people decide if they are being oppressed and if the government is acting beyond its restraints, it is up to every individual in the population to make these judgments and only one who has been granted power can use it, this goes back to the government being granted its powers by the people. Again I dare you to tell me ONE running government that does not subject its will to the people it governs... the egyption government.
[QUOTE="curono"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] what the government mandates it is only followed by the will of the people if the people in large feel it unjust they will revoke the power of the government to govern. all powers come from the people, not the government, a representative government is made so the people have more of a say and the people allow the government to govern, creating a stable state. "Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained." again the people decide if they are being oppressed and if the government is acting beyond its restraints, it is up to every individual in the population to make these judgments and only one who has been granted power can use it, this goes back to the government being granted its powers by the people.surrealnumber5Again I dare you to tell me ONE running government that does not subject its will to the people it governs... the egyption government.
This post made me smile.
[QUOTE="curono"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] what the government mandates it is only followed by the will of the people if the people in large feel it unjust they will revoke the power of the government to govern. all powers come from the people, not the government, a representative government is made so the people have more of a say and the people allow the government to govern, creating a stable state. "Tyranny is just about opression and unrestrained." again the people decide if they are being oppressed and if the government is acting beyond its restraints, it is up to every individual in the population to make these judgments and only one who has been granted power can use it, this goes back to the government being granted its powers by the people.surrealnumber5Again I dare you to tell me ONE running government that does not subject its will to the people it governs... the egyption government. I guess you can't read right. I said RUNNING GOVERNMENT. Egyptian government as it is now isnt fully functional and isnt really running.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the the expense of? what is just is subjective and what is unjust is tyrannical, if he does not feel he should be forced to pay for others things and is, the entity forcing is imposing tyranny on him.surrealnumber5
If we go to both ends we can get tyranny in two different ways.. The best way has always been striking a fine balance between the two.. That is why if we look through out the world the most prosperous nations strike up this balance of grey.
only force and abuse of power can be called tyrannical, you can come up with another name for the other end unless you believe a dictatorship of the proletariat could form, but unless there is power and force there is no tyrannyAnd their certainly is if you look back to the early 1900s... Do you even know how business operated? They were violent towards their workers.. Oh but you would say just quit! Yeah except the business could black list the workers in which the worker would never able to get a job with any cartel of theirs which they controlled everything.. The businesses told the workers who to vote for, and if they found they didn't vote for the correct person they would have this happen tot hem.. Ford had a securiyt force they forced themselves into their worker homes to do contraband searches.. So yet again both sides can have tyranny..
It's true. There's a reason why the US is the economic center of the world.[QUOTE="Pirate700"]
[QUOTE="Cpt-Obvious"] =O That's really offensive to an entire continent. I doubt you reallt mean that.
worlock77
It's not going to be for long.
it has already been for long, and im sure it will stay that way
Because capitalism is what keeps us from the mediocrity of Europe. And your thing about "reducing the gap" just brings the upper and upper-middle down. It doesn't bring the lower and middle up.
Pirate700
It depends how you define mediocre. If a country's greatness is only determined by military and economic power, a democratic society is kinda counter-productive (or I should say a fascist country would develop even faster).
im an american and i want more socialism
[QUOTE="metalkitten"]coolbeans90
You salaries are in the same ballpark. By purchasing power parity, the U.S. median household income scores above some Scandinavian countries, (generally we don't top Norway though) and that is before taxes. (whereby income is taken to fund government services) All things considered, real purchasing power is relatively close.
why do u all complain about ur high prices in stuff then when in reality ur stuff is super cheap compared to europe and why dont japan sell games for higher prices in such a rich country as usa then? that said ur salery dont include free school for everyone, health care, and a social security net in the way sweden got ull never see beggars in sweden, very few homeless compared to other countries i wonder what u do with ur saleries??? oh yeah i guess alot goes to unis etc - no need for that here i get the impression that ure a rich country but the money is kinda spread - meaning many poor and many rich - while its somewhat more equal here? but if ure so rich i think u should as a country really think more about nature and pollution and wellfare for those in ur country that are not so lucky
1. Most Americans cannot accurately define Socialism (same condition exists most places worldwide)
2. The Soviet Union 'owned' the word Socialism for a long time. Indeed, the Soviet Union excelled at making socialism synonymous with the USSR in the American consciousness for six decades.
3. American identity is tied as much to conceptions of what they are not, as it is to conceptions of what they are (similarly as a Canadian, one of our self defining conceptions is that we are not Americans)
4. The interplay between the above items means that many Americans cannot and will not accept anything to do with Socialism even though most of them don't actually know what Socialism is or how to recognize it.
5. The result is that Socialism cannot be rationally discussed by many Americans, even though America is a mixed economy and many examples of socialism exist within it.
6. The same thing applies with other words like: Redistribution. The American Right has a particular disdain of this word and in many circles Redistribution is a code word for commie, pinko, libbbbberal. I enjoy pointing out to people that the Free Market is in fact the height of redistribution of wealth; unfortunately, this usually goes over their heads :)
[QUOTE="Pirate700"]It's true. There's a reason why the US is the economic center of the world. Well, Since China is quickly becoming the largest economic power, maybe we should all be Communist, to avoid "mediocrity". Communist Capitalism obviously > Democratic Capitalism[QUOTE="Cpt-Obvious"] =O That's really offensive to an entire continent. I doubt you reallt mean that.
II_Seraphim_II
"Communist Capitalism" is an oxymoron.
Anything that threatens meritocracy should get these reactions , survival of the fittest , happens in nature , we are part of it.
lol. Way to generalize an entire population on what you think they are like. Pretty funny stuff.1. Most Americans cannot accurately define Socialism (same condition exists most places worldwide)
2. The Soviet Union 'owned' the word Socialism for a long time. Indeed, the Soviet Union excelled at making socialism synonymous with the USSR in the American consciousness for six decades.
3. American identity is tied as much to conceptions of what they are not, as it is to conceptions of what they are (similarly as a Canadian, one of our self defining conceptions is that we are not Americans)
4. The interplay between the above items means that many Americans cannot and will not accept anything to do with Socialism even though most of them don't actually know what Socialism is or how to recognize it.
5. The result is that Socialism cannot be rationally discussed by many Americans, even though America is a mixed economy and many examples of socialism exist within it.
6. The same thing applies with other words like: Redistribution. The American Right has a particular disdain of this word and in many circles Redistribution is a code word for commie, pinko, libbbbberal. I enjoy pointing out to people that the Free Market is in fact the height of redistribution of wealth; unfortunately, this usually goes over their heads :)
SUD123456
[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="metalkitten"]metalkitten
You salaries are in the same ballpark. By purchasing power parity, the U.S. median household income scores above some Scandinavian countries, (generally we don't top Norway though) and that is before taxes. (whereby income is taken to fund government services) All things considered, real purchasing power is relatively close.
why do u all complain about ur high prices in stuff then when in reality ur stuff is super cheap compared to europe and why dont japan sell games for higher prices in such a rich country as usa then? that said ur salery dont include free school for everyone, health care, and a social security net in the way sweden got ull never see beggars in sweden, very few homeless compared to other countries i wonder what u do with ur saleries??? oh yeah i guess alot goes to unis etc - no need for that here i get the impression that ure a rich country but the money is kinda spread - meaning many poor and many rich - while its somewhat more equal here? but if ure so rich i think u should as a country really think more about nature and pollution and wellfare for those in ur country that are not so luckySchool is free, and a fair amount of uni costs are covered by grants and government loans. Why do we complain about prices? People ALWAYS complain about prices and that will never change. That doesn't change the statistics regarding income though. The majority of health care in the country is funded by the government. (programs which cover the poor, the elderly, and government employees + military) Moreover, the increased amount services provided by your government require higher amounts of money to be withheld from salaries. (payroll taxes and such) As you say, there is a higher wealth disparity in the U.S. However, the median income by purchasing power parity (which is what the most people make, distinct from what the average is) is relatively equivalent to Western Europe and the Nordic countries. Welfare programs do exist, although they are obviously unpopular. And there are measures taken by the Enviromental Protection Agency to limit enviromental damage. (however the U.S. isn't all too keen on cutting back carbon emissions) I don't agree with all of these functions of government, but they certainly exist.
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="Pirate700"]It's true. There's a reason why the US is the economic center of the world.
lightleggy
It's not going to be for long.
it has already been for long, and im sure it will stay that waythis is interesting... your the only one who thinks so... please explain
[QUOTE="metalkitten"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
You salaries are in the same ballpark. By purchasing power parity, the U.S. median household income scores above some Scandinavian countries, (generally we don't top Norway though) and that is before taxes. (whereby income is taken to fund government services) All things considered, real purchasing power is relatively close.
why do u all complain about ur high prices in stuff then when in reality ur stuff is super cheap compared to europe and why dont japan sell games for higher prices in such a rich country as usa then? that said ur salery dont include free school for everyone, health care, and a social security net in the way sweden got ull never see beggars in sweden, very few homeless compared to other countries i wonder what u do with ur saleries??? oh yeah i guess alot goes to unis etc - no need for that here i get the impression that ure a rich country but the money is kinda spread - meaning many poor and many rich - while its somewhat more equal here? but if ure so rich i think u should as a country really think more about nature and pollution and wellfare for those in ur country that are not so luckySchool is free, and a fair amount of uni costs are covered by grants and government loans. Why do we complain about prices? People ALWAYS complain about prices and that will never change. That doesn't change the statistics regarding income though. The majority of health care in the country is funded by the government. (programs which cover the poor, the elderly, and government employees + military) Moreover, the increased amount services provided by your government require higher amounts of money to be withheld from salaries. (payroll taxes and such) As you say, there is a higher wealth disparity in the U.S. However, the median income by purchasing power parity (which is what the most people make, distinct from what the average is) is relatively equivalent to Western Europe and the Nordic countries. Welfare programs do exist, although they are obviously unpopular. And there are measures taken by the Enviromental Protection Agency to limit enviromental damage. (however the U.S. isn't all too keen on cutting back carbon emissions) I don't agree with all of these functions of government, but they certainly exist.
i was thinking about something...while looking at the ridiculus cheap price ull get ur coming 3ds for...maybe i should import... well i was thinking ...i realized my canadian friend says they only get 2 weeks paid vacation in canada....how about usa? cause i hope u realize sweden have atleast 25 paid vacation days and u can use 4 weeks of those in a row if u want also what do u have lunch boxes for? dont u get free food in school? and sorry but ur college and unis arent free for all - ours are completely free, in unis u just need to buy the books (not needed in other schools) also u can take loans to pay rent and so on, and u can also get free money while studying for a certain number of years - for uni before uni a person will get monthly studiemoney for free - to buy clothes or whatever - cause its nothing in school we need to pay for, going to doctor, shrink etc in school is free again i got no clue what u spend ur massive amount of saleries on? and we should alarm japan to sell cheap to europe and ull get the expensive game stuff since ure richer actually ill take a lower salery and more taxes anyday to make it more equal for people in my country (cause face it - totally equal it will never get) the question really is - who gets out most of the saleries, compared to what is included in them?[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="worlock77"]
It's not going to be for long.
it has already been for long, and im sure it will stay that waythis is interesting... your the only one who thinks so... please explain
He is not the only one. Freedom to advance, and freedom to fail is unique in a country carved out of a wilderness. Government needs to back off and let the people who yearn to be free have their liberty to succeed/fail as they will. A nation of truely free people is wiser, more experienced, successful. Government controlled people are just that, controled and not free to pursue their liberty.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="metalkitten"] why do u all complain about ur high prices in stuff then when in reality ur stuff is super cheap compared to europe and why dont japan sell games for higher prices in such a rich country as usa then? that said ur salery dont include free school for everyone, health care, and a social security net in the way sweden got ull never see beggars in sweden, very few homeless compared to other countries i wonder what u do with ur saleries??? oh yeah i guess alot goes to unis etc - no need for that here i get the impression that ure a rich country but the money is kinda spread - meaning many poor and many rich - while its somewhat more equal here? but if ureso rich i think u should as a country really think more about nature and pollution and wellfare for those in ur country that are not so luckymetalkitten
School is free, and a fair amount of uni costs are covered by grants and government loans. Why do we complain about prices? People ALWAYS complain about prices and that will never change. That doesn't change the statistics regarding income though. The majority of health care in the country is funded by the government. (programs which cover the poor, the elderly, and government employees + military) Moreover, the increased amount services provided by your government require higher amounts of money to be withheld from salaries. (payroll taxes and such) As you say, there is a higher wealth disparity in the U.S. However, the median income by purchasing power parity (which is what the most people make, distinct from what the average is) is relatively equivalent to Western Europe and the Nordic countries. Welfare programs doexist, although they are obviously unpopular. And there are measures taken by the Enviromental Protection Agency to limit enviromental damage. (however the U.S. isn't all too keen on cutting back carbon emissions) I don't agree with all of these functions of government, but they certainly exist.
i was thinking about something...while looking at the ridiculus cheap price ull get ur coming 3ds for...maybe i should import... well i was thinking ...i realized my canadian friend says they only get 2 weeks paid vacation in canada....how about usa? cause i hope u realize sweden have atleast 25 paid vacation days and u can use 4 weeks of those in a row if u want also what do u have lunch boxes for? dont u get free food in school? and sorry but ur college and unis arent free for all - ours are completely free, in unis u just need to buy the books (not needed in other schools) also u can take loans to pay rent and so on, and u can also get free money while studying for a certain number of years - for uni before uni a person will get monthly studiemoney for free - to buy clothes or whatever - cause its nothing in school we need to pay for, going to doctor, shrink etc in school is free again i got no clue what u spend ur massive amount of saleries on? and we should alarm japan to sell cheap to europe and ull get the expensive game stuff since ure richer actually ill take a lower salery and more taxes anyday to make it more equal for people in my country (cause face it - totally equal it will never get) the question really is - who gets out most of the saleries, compared to what is included in them?I'm honestly not sure what causes the difference in video game prices between countries, but I don't think that I would continue video gaming for the prices that you guys pay. I think that over $200 for a portable gaming system is absurd, and won't be purchasing a 3DS till the price is lowered and the battery life extended in a future model. (maybe we Americans are stingy?)
There isn't a government set minimum that I am aware of, (there might be in some states) so the amount of vacation time varies by the job. There are lunch programs, although I am not exactly sure how widespread these are. They may apply only to those of lower income or low income school districts, i.e. those that need them. But I don't know the details. From what I gather, there is more financial aid for university in other countries. I'll concede that point.
I never said that the U.S. is richer than the Nordic countries. However, pre-tax median household income (what most people make, not the average, so this statistic to some level accounts for the income disparity) is in roughly the same area as northwestern Europe. The income disparity is still higher though. And I'd imagine that Americans spend a portion of their salaries on services that in your country are provided by your government, funded by higher taxes. (health insurance for instance)
EDITS: The space bar on this PC is evil.
Because Faux news said it would destroy the planet and turn everyone gay So all the Christians were like "Nooooooooooooooo!"...
[QUOTE="metalkitten"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
School is free, and a fair amount of uni costs are covered by grants and government loans. Why do we complain about prices? People ALWAYS complain about prices and that will never change. That doesn't change the statistics regarding income though. The majority of health care in the country is funded by the government. (programs which cover the poor, the elderly, and government employees + military) Moreover, the increased amount services provided by your government require higher amounts of money to be withheld from salaries. (payroll taxes and such) As you say, there is a higher wealth disparity in the U.S. However, the median income by purchasing power parity (which is what the most people make, distinct from what the average is) is relatively equivalent to Western Europe and the Nordic countries. Welfare programs doexist, although they are obviously unpopular. And there are measures taken by the Enviromental Protection Agency to limit enviromental damage. (however the U.S. isn't all too keen on cutting back carbon emissions) I don't agree with all of these functions of government, but they certainly exist.
i was thinking about something...while looking at the ridiculus cheap price ull get ur coming 3ds for...maybe i should import... well i was thinking ...i realized my canadian friend says they only get 2 weeks paid vacation in canada....how about usa? cause i hope u realize sweden have atleast 25 paid vacation days and u can use 4 weeks of those in a row if u want also what do u have lunch boxes for? dont u get free food in school? and sorry but ur college and unis arent free for all - ours are completely free, in unis u just need to buy the books (not needed in other schools) also u can take loans to pay rent and so on, and u can also get free money while studying for a certain number of years - for uni before uni a person will get monthly studiemoney for free - to buy clothes or whatever - cause its nothing in school we need to pay for, going to doctor, shrink etc in school is free again i got no clue what u spend ur massive amount of saleries on? and we should alarm japan to sell cheap to europe and ull get the expensive game stuff since ure richer actually ill take a lower salery and more taxes anyday to make it more equal for people in my country (cause face it - totally equal it will never get) the question really is - who gets out most of the saleries, compared to what is included in them?I'm honestly not sure what causes the difference in video game prices between countries, but I don't think that I would continue video gaming for the prices that you guys pay. I think that over $200 for a portable gaming system is absurd, and won't be purchasing a 3DS till the price is lowered and the battery life extended in a future model. (maybe we Americans are stingy?)
There isn't a government set minimum that I am aware of, (there might be in some states) so the amount of vacation time varies by the job. There are lunch programs, although I am not exactly sure how widespread these are. They may apply only to those of lower income or low income school districts, i.e. those that need them. But I don't know the details. From what I gather, there is more financial aid for university in other countries. I'll concede that point.
I never said that the U.S. is richer than the Nordic countries. However, pre-tax median household income (what most people make, not the average, so this statistic to some level accounts for the income disparity) is in roughly the same area as northwestern Europe. The income disparity is still higher though. And I'd imagine that Americans spend a portion of their salaries on services that in your country are provided by your government, funded by higher taxes. (health insurance for instance)
EDITS: The space bar on this PC is evil.
i just converted the lowest price i seen on a 3ds in sweden for prebooking= 400 american dollars, i gotta admit i dunno how japan is thinking when giving so low prices to north america and so high to europe nonstop not to mention we have to wait for the games forever (IF we get them) the prices wont stop me from gaming though...(never) but i feel since the 3ds seems to be regioncoded and i import basically all my ds games and some ps3 (cheaper, faster etc)...maybe im better of buying a north american 3ds? not cause its so much cheaper but cause games are too and most importantly im scared that the games i want wont even reach europe:( sorry that was way off topic but i think we pretty much covered what we talked about in differences in salery and what they go to
Public schools here in the States is not free. Everyone pays property taxes on their real estate to the locality they live in. That goes towards schools. I won't go into college as it is known that here in the States, people have to pay to go unless they have a benefits package from work or the government like the GI Bill.
Why are Americans so against socialism? For some, it's the fact that they work their tail bones off and want to be able to enjoy the life their hard work gives them. I have been able to visit countries with social programs such as health care, free education and a host of other government paid for services, the tax rates were in the 40-50% range. So, the notion that the services are free are a misnomer as youare paying for them, directly out of your paycheck to the government.
Here in the US, those who make between $30,000 to $40,000 a year pay between 22-28% in taxes. The tax rate is a bit higher for those who make more, up to a certain point and of course, it is a bit lower for those who make less. Now I make between $700-$1000 a week depending on how many hours I work. More taxes are taken out the more I make per week. Now, look at someone who only makes minimum wage ($290 a week at 40 hours). If the government were to increase the number of services it provides to US citizens, 40% from a worker making minimum wage will have less than $700 a month to live on. I would fare better, but still (more about this later). That $700 would have to buy food, pay rent and other bills. $700 is not going to get someone a great place to live or a lot of food to eat.
Now, people talk about wealth redistribution. My question is why, when I work upwards of 90 hours a week, should I have to pay for people who would rather sit on their hind ends all day watching Oprah and shoving babies out just to get money from the government? Now, I don't mind helping those who really need help and are willing to help themselves, but if someone is just gonna be a baby machine, then sorry, get a job.
The wages I make now allow me to afford to eat a bit better than I used to. I was the king of stove top foods. After years of eating stuff like Hamburger Helper (I did each chicken and pork chops along with other foods especially during the summer months when I could grill out), I am deserving of being able to drop some change on a whole New York Strip or a whole beef tenderloin (I picked up one this past weekend and got 7 steaks, 2 roasts, stew beef and beef tips out of it). Increase the tax rate to 40% and I am back to eating food from boxes again. As it is, my rent goes to sending kids to school and I don't have any kids.
I went through plenty of lean times, without depending on the government to get by. I didn't have a lot of the niceties such as cable or satellite TV, I didn't even buy a PC until I could afford it (though really didn't want one until I found out about a video game based on a book I was reading was being made). I didn't spend beyond my means (though as a mechanic a good share of my life outside of the military, I had to buy tools so I could work on vehicles that kept coming out with all sorts of different fasteners. :| ). A change of careers allowed me to do more, but as I said, I have to work long hours and I deserve to reap the benefits of said hard work, without sharing it with those who just want to screw around in school (think of the kid who only answered 4 questions on his FCAT and his Mom made him stand on a street corner with a sign declaring his 1.2 GPA) and not get a good education that would allow them to get a decent job where they can support themselves.
[QUOTE="Hemmaroids"]Um, America already has a little bit of socialism in it (medicare, veterans benefits, etc).mejiseike
yes but when someone says universal heath care... the rich people go crazy and say its Communism cuz theyre going to lose money
I'm not rich, but when I hear universal health care I go crazy because there is no way that I can see it not ending up with a lower quality of health care.[QUOTE="mejiseike"][QUOTE="Hemmaroids"]Um, America already has a little bit of socialism in it (medicare, veterans benefits, etc).YellowOneKinobi
yes but when someone says universal heath care... the rich people go crazy and say its Communism cuz theyre going to lose money
I'm not rich, but when I hear universal health care I go crazy because there is no way that I can see it not ending up with a lower quality of health care.The french have it and they have the highest quality of medical care in the world.....as does pretty much every other developed nation.....at least we beat cuba though.[QUOTE="mejiseike"][QUOTE="Hemmaroids"]Um, America already has a little bit of socialism in it (medicare, veterans benefits, etc).YellowOneKinobi
yes but when someone says universal heath care... the rich people go crazy and say its Communism cuz theyre going to lose money
I'm not rich, but when I hear universal health care I go crazy because there is no way that I can see it not ending up with a lower quality of health care.I'm not rich either, I just believe that if you won't provide yourself with something you don't have the right to force me to provide it for you.[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="mejiseike"]
yes but when someone says universal heath care... the rich people go crazy and say its Communism cuz theyre going to lose money
I'm not rich, but when I hear universal health care I go crazy because there is no way that I can see it not ending up with a lower quality of health care.I'm not rich either, I just believe that if you won't provide yourself with something you don't have the right to force me to provide it for you. AMEN TO THAT!!! (And before I get attacked, I'm all for helping people that truly need it.........but not so much for people who CHOOSE not to provide for themselves).[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="metalkitten"] i was thinking about something...while looking at the ridiculus cheap price ull get ur coming 3ds for...maybe i should import... well i was thinking ...i realized my canadian friend says they only get 2 weeks paid vacation in canada....how about usa? cause i hope u realize sweden have atleast 25 paid vacation days and u can use 4 weeks of those in a row if u want also what do u have lunch boxes for? dont u get free food in school? and sorry but ur college and unis arent free for all - ours are completely free, in unis u just need to buy the books (not needed in other schools) also u can take loans to pay rent and so on, and u can also get free money while studying for a certain number of years - for uni before uni a person will get monthly studiemoney for free - to buy clothes or whatever - cause its nothing in school we need to pay for, going to doctor, shrink etc in school is free again i got no clue what u spend ur massive amount of saleries on? and we should alarm japan to sell cheap to europe and ull get the expensive game stuff since ure richer actually ill take a lower salery and more taxes anyday to make it more equal for people in my country (cause face it - totally equal it will never get) the question really is - who gets out most of the saleries, compared to what is included in them?metalkitten
I'm honestly not sure what causes the difference in video game prices between countries, but I don't think that I would continue video gaming for the prices that you guys pay. I think that over $200 for a portable gaming system is absurd, and won't be purchasing a 3DS till the price is lowered and the battery life extended in a future model. (maybe we Americans are stingy?)
There isn't a government set minimum that I am aware of, (there might be in some states) so the amount of vacation time varies by the job. There are lunch programs, although I am not exactly sure how widespread these are. They may apply only to those of lower income or low income school districts, i.e. those that need them. But I don't know the details. From what I gather, there is more financial aid for university in other countries. I'll concede that point.
I never said that the U.S. is richer than the Nordic countries. However, pre-tax median household income (what most people make, not the average, so this statistic to some level accounts for the income disparity) is in roughly the same area as northwestern Europe. The income disparity is still higher though. And I'd imagine that Americans spend a portion of their salaries on services that in your country are provided by your government, funded by higher taxes. (health insurance for instance)
EDITS: The space bar on this PC is evil.
i just converted the lowest price i seen on a 3ds in sweden for prebooking= 400 american dollars, i gotta admit i dunno how japan is thinking when giving so low prices to north america and so high to europe nonstop not to mention we have to wait for the games forever (IF we get them) the prices wont stop me from gaming though...(never) but i feel since the 3ds seems to be regioncoded and i import basically all my ds games and some ps3 (cheaper, faster etc)...maybe im better of buying a north american 3ds? not cause its so much cheaper but cause games are too and most importantly im scared that the games i want wont even reach europe:( sorry that was way off topic but i think we pretty much covered what we talked about in differences in salery and what they go to$400. Wow. The 3DS is going to run for $250 over here. Since you import games anyway, and the games might be region coded (Are they? I never liked that) it might make sense to just import one.
Anyway, not to kill the convo, but the mod's tolerance for video game posts is limited in off-topic. You can pm me if you have more questions.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment