Justice is not just about therapy of rehabilitation or a criminal. It is also about paying for what misdeeds they have done (the exact word slips me). So I would say he either needs to do a hefty jail sentence or pay a hefty fine to the woman he raped and then I wouldn't care as long as he was rehabilitated (unfortunately there is no real way to tell this, but in your hypothetical situation there is I guess).
Plzhelpmelearn's forum posts
[QUOTE="Plzhelpmelearn"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Why should taxes be apportioned by percentage of income instead of a flat tax applied equally to all peoples? That seems far more fair. VandalvideoBecause that does not take into consideration that some people make vastly more money than others. You think a BK employee making 10 grand net a year should pay the same as the CEO of BK making probably 10 million+? Why should those who make more necessarily have to pay more? Because they are getting more. Philosophically speaking I understand the point that we are all individuals and equal in our humanity, but unfortunately in practicality that is where "equal" ends. The rich have vast amounts of income that they can dispose of and not enter anywhere close to struggling for survival. Meanwhile, the lowest earners don't even pay taxes and struggle everyday to make ends meet.
Why should taxes be apportioned by percentage of income instead of a flat tax applied equally to all peoples? That seems far more fair. VandalvideoBecause that does not take into consideration that some people make vastly more money than others. You think a BK employee making 10 grand net a year should pay the same as the CEO of BK making probably 10 million+?
Yea those poor rich people....now they have to downgrade their private airplane and cruiseliner. Percentage wise you may be correct, but you don't mention that 1% of a rich persons yearly income is several times that of even a middle classes person's 100% income. Also, rich people have been increasing their share of the wealth available, increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Meanwhile, minimum wage can't even keep up with inflation. I am not anti rich, but I am anti greed. there needs to be some new reform to help shrink the gaping gap between the highest and lowest earners. I personally think that there should be some ratio between what the top earner and lowest earner in a company can make. So if some fat cats at the top want to give themselves bonuses and salary hikes they have to do it for the lower earners at the same time.Maybe she needs to take some basic math classes.
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
She portrays the top income earners as people that are dodging taxes or paying nothing. In reality, the vast majority of federal income tax is paid for by the top 10% of income earners. How is that not paying their share? You can always ask them to pay more, but I wouldn't portray them as some kind of opportunistic thieves dodging their responsibilities. Seems to me, she's just lying to the public and trying to generate populist support. Shame she can't discuss the real facts in an intelligent manner.
Even more interesting is that the top 1% accounts for 20% of the gross earnings, but pays 40% of the tax. They're paying double the tax burden. Maybe they could pay more, but how does that correlate to them "not paying their fair share".
Certainly, policies can be undertaken to improve the income distribution in this country - education seems to be the key for that, but simply demanding that money get redistributed is not in line with the constitution or the founding ideals of this country.
sonicare
This whole thing sounds really sketchy to me. Seems like someone intentionally gave this family the shaft. How can you foreclose a house based on 800 dollars and a couple unanswered letters? His wifey was an idiot for not opening them though, depression or no depression.
[QUOTE="Gallego"]Voted for Lennon. I also miss Jimi Hendrix, Freddie Mercury and Bob Marley.diegosanchezMMA
when i first thought of this question
lennon was the first i thought about, that alone was enough to vote for him you know but i dont know jackson was a big loss he was and still is a legend
He is a legend, no doubt, but I would not consider him a loss to the music industry. He died well after his prime. I still think Buddy Holly would be considered one of the biggest losses considering he died about a year and a half into his career and is still considered one of the innovators of modern music.[QUOTE="kidsmelly"]mens shower, womans shower, gays shower? or unisex? those are the only two fair ways of doing it I don't think a homosexual shower would work considering you would be putting a bunch of people who are sexually attracted to each other naked in a shower room together. In the male room you'd prob have to be watch out for getting stabbed constantly. They could put gay guys with the women, but then all the guys would prob claim to be gayGood step forward but how will they handle shower situation during training and boot camp?
surrealnumber5
Apparantly circus peanuts are not that popular here. So I would like to know what kind of candy you all enjoy so that I may inform you as to how much your preferences suck.
I'm also a big fan of sour patch kids and mike & ikes
Circus peanuts suck. I feel your drift, but an "ultimate power" didn't make that specific peanut go into your mouth. Ghost_702I'd prefer if you wouldn't feel my drift.... Also, are you sure that it was not pre ordained from the foundations of the world by an ultimate power that this individual circus peanut would enter my mouth? ...and why all the circus peanut hate?
Log in to comment