Even more problematic stuff
- Seabass
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
- About me: Pluviophile
- Location: Covidiocracy
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
More #fakenews about nonexistent voter suppression which does not happen in America according to Coity Two, who definitely has a firm grip on reality and is totally not living in a fantasy world fabricated out of whole cloth by far-right propagandists.
“This is voter suppression”: black seniors in Georgia ordered off of bus taking them to vote
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/ ... uppression
“This is voter suppression”: black seniors in Georgia ordered off of bus taking them to vote
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/ ... uppression
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
Re: Even more problematic stuff
He also doesn't seem to understand that NASA need to explore and understand our own World with its extreme conditions to understand how we can explore and survive other Worlds. Mars rovers were tested in deserts, for instance.JimC wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:56 pmAnd (I'm not sure 42 really gets this), its satellites are in space (you know, the word that is part of NASA...)pErvinalia wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:07 pmWho said it should only do that? Its earth science department is rightly renowned.
Also, it was NASA scientist James Hansen who brought climate change to our attention in '88. His prediction (average temperature projection) back then for now is pretty spot on. He is only off because he factored in CFCs, but we banned them so when you take them back out of the equation he's correct.
So saying NASA is a tool of alarmists puts the cart before the horse. It is because of the work of NASA amd the data from their satellites we know more fully the extent of the damage. What the Republicans advocate, by cancelling satelittes, is akin to going into a hospital and removing tech like MRI to stick it to those cancer alarmists.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
Re: Even more problematic stuff
You endorsing a political party would be death to that party.pErvinalia wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:48 amWhat you should do about it is stop supporting conservatives and wet liberals. Support the Green parties.
Do you really think anyone could value your words in another way?
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 38031
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
At least try and form some rational view for yourself based on the available evidence.Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:16 amTwo questions for you.
What would you like me to do about this?
What little I can to leave a low-carbon footprint, stay informed on the current science, talk to others about the issues, encourage people to engage and participate in democracy, and cast my vote towards a better long-term outcome for all.Cunt wrote: What are you doing about this?
So, what do you think I should be doing about this?
What are you doing about this?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
What would you do if you thought that the dire predictions of the climate change movement were accurate?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
Re: Even more problematic stuff
I think you should personally look for the biggest contributers, and address them. Probably, your car is not needed, and a HUGE cost. Heating space in a home you don't use is another.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:28 pmWhat little I can to leave a low-carbon footprint, stay informed on the current science, talk to others about the issues, encourage people to engage and participate in democracy, and cast my vote towards a better long-term outcome for all.
So, what do you think I should be doing about this?
What are you doing about this?
Being informed on current science is ok, but doesn't help a lot. Being up on technology can be.
I've had some of my biggest improvements in my personal life using my willingness to be wrong. Let me give you a small example.
I love Trevor. Worked with him years ago, and wanted him to visit. He was dating a wonderful woman who had was highly educated in 'water ethics'. I invited them to come visit, camp, fish etc. I tried to tempt them to move here, and consider it a huge win that it worked. Meghan now works in our government, disagrees with much of what I think, and does a great job protecting our water.
Anyway, when they drove up, we drove south to meet them at Kakisa for some fishing. When we saw them, I was in the car. We pulled up to chat, and after a few minutes, Trevor asked 'are you idling'?
I shut the car down, and we started arguing (gently, over the next several months) about how that should be applied. I thought starting a car used more fuel, so shutting it down, below a certain number of minutes, would actually use MORE fuel. For the next several years, I would leave my car idling if the stop was 2 minutes or less. I don't LIKE being called out on idling, but don't mind changing behaviour for a man I respect so much. Burning less fuel is good.
Years later, (very recently actually) I learned that the custom in Europe is to force auto manufacturers to set up their cars to shut down (turn off motor) when stopped - even at a red light. This didn't make sense mechanically, since I 'knew' that starting a car took more fuel. Looking into it further, I discovered that fuel injection, along with other improvements, changed things and now it DOES make sense to shut the engine off. I not only do it personally now, but can explain it a lot more clearly if it ever comes up.
I shut it down every chance I can now. It makes a VERY small difference, I'm not bragging about that, but learning does change things, and it wouldn't have, except that I disagreed out loud with a person I care about. It made learning about that interesting and important.
Currently, I use my vehicle for groceries, longer road trips and occasional social outings. Every other travel I do is on my running shoes (2300kms so far this year)
So what do I want you to do? I think look for your wasted efforts. Refute some of the nonsense. That shit damages efforts more than you would probably acknowledge. Another way to say this is that you could recycle plastic bags your whole life, and outperform that effort with a decision to stop bringing recyclable paper to the recycling centre (in a case where doing so was wasteful - as is the case in some locations) Here in this remote area, we have City bins in a few places, where people are encouraged to bring their cardboard etc. It goes to the dump where it is staged. If the price of waste paper is high enough to cover the fuel needed to bring it south, it goes on a truck. If not, it gets buried at the dump.
To me, all the fuel used to move that stuff around is wasted. If you (assuming you care a lot) discovered that your cardboard was PURE waste, (as opposed to recycleable) you would make much better decisions about it.
Here is what I would like, if you could make a company like amazon, but good.
What would be 'good'? Glad you asked...
Packaging adds a lot of waste (in many ways) to our waste-footprint. Fuel, materials and manufacture are huge in this area.
Goodamazon would be just like the current one, except that when JimC purchases his new running watch, the tracking brings the package RIGHT to him, (rather than to his house) at the time of his choosing, and the delivery tech waits to take all the packaging back to Goodamazon for disposal. If there is a return issue, that same delivery tech comes, packages up the return, and takes it away.
Making the retailers face the packaging problem would have giants like WalMart, Amazon or others cutting packaging waste with CORPORATE efficiency and competition sharpening their systems at every turn.
What most will suggest, is that consumers should think they are bad persons for not folding, sorting and delivering their waste to the recycling centre. Convince all of them, and each has all the power one expects compared to a corporation.
What else should I do? I discuss my disagreement out loud, and change my mind when it seems right. I use my contacts with scientists to help inform my decisions about who to vote for and what to support. I use the evidence available to me to make decisions about who to support. The 'water ethics' educated pal I have disagrees with me on a lot of stuff, and has changed my mind on some of it. Not important though - I support her even when we disagree.
The left, who align themselves as the 'Earth-Savers' are as full of shit as anyone, but are somehow believed wholeheartedly about a lot of baloney which would be rejected if presented by the right. I see a lot of people opposing pipelines (for example) but they seldom talk about what to do about current oil demands. I think it would be better if we could power with nuclear, hydro, solar or wind, but it has to be viable. Has to be a real gain. I could make money putting up solar panels on my house, but not if the government removed their financial support. To me, that means it isn't yet competitive. Lots of people installing them for the government cheese. A few are using them more practically, but it isn't good enough yet.
Look at how quickly everyone gobbled up that 'Solar Roadways' garbage. I fell for it for a few minutes, but as soon as the notion is examined with any seriousness, it falls apart. Government and crowdfunding would suggest it was a great idea though.
I think we need to also recognize that people want to develop their world. When people start lobbying the government to stop development in the Sahtu region, they are often from Vancouver. I say remediate Vancouver first. Those living in the Sahtu deserve infrastructure and development too. A 'better outcome for all' might lead a city-idiot to oppose development. Preserving a future for their Vancouver grandchildren at the expense of the families in the Sahtu Region.
Here is another - stop complicated taxing. Ending the CRA (IRS in the states) by making tax simple enough for everyone to understand, then stop employing so many people, printers and associated administration 'carbon-costs'. Bet you won't find any government in favour of uncomplicated taxes. Mostly, they seem to favour making it more and more complex, requiring more and more tax lawyers, accountants and other 'carbon-heavy' features.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 73101
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
If one accepts the consensus from climate scientists, then one also accepts the analysis of the consequences of a multi-degree rise in average temperature. Those are indeed fairly dire, and if we simply continue our use of fossil fuels without change, major problems for both human civilisation and the environment will ensue.
The question of what should be done is indeed political, but it should be well-informed by the most accurate science possible, and draw on innovative technology. The free enterprise system can be a very important part of the solution, once dinosaur-like thinking from some corporations fades away. Already, market forces are swinging a lot of investment towards renewables.
One clear and straightforward path forward is a move away from generating electricity by burning coal. I'm going to be pragmatic here; it is not a matter of suddenly switching of coal-fired power stations, but a steady, planned reduction, matching a steady, planned increase in renewables; this needs to happen as fast as possible, but not in a panic-driven way. Some green thinkers may consider this far too soft, but we need to be realistic and practical. As this occurs, there will be a flurry of interest in a variety of renewable sources. Some will no doubt end up on the scrap heap, having found to be impractical, but they need to be trialled to find this out. Personally, I think that the mainstays will be solar and wind (with considerable effort put into storage solutions), with home-based solar being an important contributor. Of course, there also needs to be change in our uses of transport fuels, and a solid determination to planting forests.
In this governments need to take an important role, both in educating the public, and ensuring the best financial environment to encourage the shift, whether via tax breaks for the burgeoning renewables industry, or perhaps carbon taxes. Individuals can make a series of minor, personal decisions to reduce their carbon footprint, without necessarily donning a hair shirt and joining a commune...
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
- Seabass
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
- About me: Pluviophile
- Location: Covidiocracy
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Left wing solutions socialist climate mob alarmist! ![Why you little... ;ob;](./images/smilies/mysmilie_373.gif)
![Why you little... ;ob;](./images/smilies/mysmilie_373.gif)
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
Re: Even more problematic stuff
If they create a tax based on carbon, my guess is that tax lawyers will be very good at reducing the costs of that carbon tax on their clients.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists
-various artists
The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.
Update: I've been offered one!
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 73101
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Make it simple, direct, with no loopholes, and the lawyers will go back to what they do best, chasing ambulances...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 38031
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Good points. I don't own a car and I haven't had the heating on for 8 years, or plugged the fridge in. Aside from footwear I've bought about 3 or 4 brand new items of clothing in the last 5 years, and I mostly cook seasonally, from fresh, and do all my food shopping locally on a day-to-day basis. In the great scheme of things, and against all the people who are not even thinking of doing even some of that, it counts for nothing - but it's a start and it's the kind of individual action that sparks conversations and discussions about what 'we' could, can, couldn't, might, and mightn't do ourselves. And like my vegetarianism, it's also partly to do with trying to live in a way that's consistent and compatible with my personal ethics.Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:10 pmI think you should personally look for the biggest contributers, and address them. Probably, your car is not needed, and a HUGE cost. Heating space in a home you don't use is another.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:28 pmWhat little I can to leave a low-carbon footprint, stay informed on the current science, talk to others about the issues, encourage people to engage and participate in democracy, and cast my vote towards a better long-term outcome for all.
So, what do you think I should be doing about this?
What are you doing about this?
Hang on a mo - am I supposed to be saving the planet all by myself?
![Very Happy! :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Can I just say that I appreciate the time you took to write this, and for showing us a bit of the real CuntCunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:10 pmI've had some of my biggest improvements in my personal life using my willingness to be wrong. Let me give you a small example.
I love Trevor. Worked with him years ago, and wanted him to visit. He was dating a wonderful woman who had was highly educated in 'water ethics'. I invited them to come visit, camp, fish etc. I tried to tempt them to move here, and consider it a huge win that it worked. Meghan now works in our government, disagrees with much of what I think, and does a great job protecting our water.
Anyway, when they drove up, we drove south to meet them at Kakisa for some fishing. When we saw them, I was in the car. We pulled up to chat, and after a few minutes, Trevor asked 'are you idling'?
I shut the car down, and we started arguing (gently, over the next several months) about how that should be applied. I thought starting a car used more fuel, so shutting it down, below a certain number of minutes, would actually use MORE fuel. For the next several years, I would leave my car idling if the stop was 2 minutes or less. I don't LIKE being called out on idling, but don't mind changing behaviour for a man I respect so much. Burning less fuel is good.
Years later, (very recently actually) I learned that the custom in Europe is to force auto manufacturers to set up their cars to shut down (turn off motor) when stopped - even at a red light. This didn't make sense mechanically, since I 'knew' that starting a car took more fuel. Looking into it further, I discovered that fuel injection, along with other improvements, changed things and now it DOES make sense to shut the engine off. I not only do it personally now, but can explain it a lot more clearly if it ever comes up.
I shut it down every chance I can now. It makes a VERY small difference, I'm not bragging about that, but learning does change things, and it wouldn't have, except that I disagreed out loud with a person I care about. It made learning about that interesting and important.
Currently, I use my vehicle for groceries, longer road trips and occasional social outings. Every other travel I do is on my running shoes (2300kms so far this year)
So what do I want you to do? I think look for your wasted efforts. Refute some of the nonsense. That shit damages efforts more than you would probably acknowledge. Another way to say this is that you could recycle plastic bags your whole life, and outperform that effort with a decision to stop bringing recyclable paper to the recycling centre (in a case where doing so was wasteful - as is the case in some locations) Here in this remote area, we have City bins in a few places, where people are encouraged to bring their cardboard etc. It goes to the dump where it is staged. If the price of waste paper is high enough to cover the fuel needed to bring it south, it goes on a truck. If not, it gets buried at the dump.
To me, all the fuel used to move that stuff around is wasted. If you (assuming you care a lot) discovered that your cardboard was PURE waste, (as opposed to recycleable) you would make much better decisions about it.
Here is what I would like, if you could make a company like amazon, but good.
What would be 'good'? Glad you asked...
Packaging adds a lot of waste (in many ways) to our waste-footprint. Fuel, materials and manufacture are huge in this area.
Goodamazon would be just like the current one, except that when JimC purchases his new running watch, the tracking brings the package RIGHT to him, (rather than to his house) at the time of his choosing, and the delivery tech waits to take all the packaging back to Goodamazon for disposal. If there is a return issue, that same delivery tech comes, packages up the return, and takes it away.
Making the retailers face the packaging problem would have giants like WalMart, Amazon or others cutting packaging waste with CORPORATE efficiency and competition sharpening their systems at every turn.
What most will suggest, is that consumers should think they are bad persons for not folding, sorting and delivering their waste to the recycling centre. Convince all of them, and each has all the power one expects compared to a corporation.
What else should I do? I discuss my disagreement out loud, and change my mind when it seems right. I use my contacts with scientists to help inform my decisions about who to vote for and what to support. I use the evidence available to me to make decisions about who to support. The 'water ethics' educated pal I have disagrees with me on a lot of stuff, and has changed my mind on some of it. Not important though - I support her even when we disagree.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Where I can, I walk. I now live in a city where I can pretty much get to wherever I need to on foot within an hour or so. I took the bus yesterday because I was running late, but by the time I'd waited, and the bus had crawled into and around the town centre, with all that traffic management and annoying stopping and starting to left people on and off, I only saved myself 15mins and a few calories. But a well provisioned and integrated public transport system can achieve a lot. Hybrid buses make up an increasing proportion of the fleet here - not as good a Dutch buses of course, but there you go. Bus nerds love 'em.
Edinburgh's architectural heritage has created a large central population that's disproportionately housed in multi-occupier properties. Up and down the streets space has been created for numbers of refuse hoppers all colour-coded for compostables, cardboard and paper, glass, recyclable plastics, and general waste. The hoppers are emptied over-night at a frequency determined by housing density - though bright stickers on the hoppers themselves encourage denizens to report if a bin is full to overflowing. It seems most supermarkets offer to collect old plastic carrier bags, not just their own, coffee shops predominantly use cardboard cups (and even good old fashioned porcelain by gad!) rather than Styrofoam and they too have bins for empties, not just their own, and pubs, bars and carry-out premises will take your bottles back. Even in the suburbs different bins are provided to individual households for different kinds of waste. The local government and the public's commitment to this public pre-sorting of refuse, while not solving the problem in itself, is at least a tangible, visible thing which directs people's attention towards recycling, plastic packaging, resource use, and the like..
In my area of interest there's a lot of energy, discussion, and people doing interesting work around the areas of resource use, waste, and environmental issues - work in which community outreach and participation is to the fore.
https://nen.press/2018/08/18/see-the-fr ... s-rubbish/
https://nen.press/2018/09/06/make-your- ... -terminal/
https://www.voluntaryarts.org/lovetoupc ... e-scotland
http://edinburgh.makerfaire.com/2013/03 ... pair-cafe/
Attitudes are changing and Edinburgh, and Scotland in general, is ahead of the curve in this respect. That's not to say the West still hasn't got the majority of necessary change ahead of it, but you have to start from somewhere - even if the profit motive tends towards corruption in a developing and poorly regulated sector:
Cluster-B type personality disorders and general sociopathy will out I suppose...UK recycling industry under investigation for fraud and corruption
The plastics recycling industry is facing an investigation into suspected widespread abuse and fraud within the export system amid warnings the world is about to close the door on UK packaging waste, the Guardian has learned.
The Environment Agency (EA) has set up a team of investigators, including three retired police officers, in an attempt to deal with complaints that organised criminals and firms are abusing the system.
Six UK exporters of plastic waste have had their licences suspended or cancelled in the last three months, according to EA data. One firm has had 57 containers of plastic waste stopped at UK ports in the last three years due to concerns over contamination of waste.
Allegations that the agency is understood to be investigating include:
UK households and businesses used 11m tonnes of packaging last year, according to government figures. Two-thirds of our plastic packaging waste is exported by an export industry which was worth more than £50m last year...
- Exporters are falsely claiming for tens of thousands of tonnes of plastic waste which might not exist
- UK plastic waste is not being recycled and is being left to leak into rivers and oceans
- Illegal shipments of plastic waste are being routed to the Far East via the Netherlands
- UK firms with serial offences of shipping contaminated waste are being allowed to continue exporting.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... corruption
But at least some people are thinking about solutions, and we shouldn't necessarily be dismissed if they turn out to be a bit crap, eh?Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:10 pmThe left, who align themselves as the 'Earth-Savers' are as full of shit as anyone, but are somehow believed wholeheartedly about a lot of baloney which would be rejected if presented by the right. I see a lot of people opposing pipelines (for example) but they seldom talk about what to do about current oil demands. I think it would be better if we could power with nuclear, hydro, solar or wind, but it has to be viable. Has to be a real gain. I could make money putting up solar panels on my house, but not if the government removed their financial support. To me, that means it isn't yet competitive. Lots of people installing them for the government cheese. A few are using them more practically, but it isn't good enough yet.
Look at how quickly everyone gobbled up that 'Solar Roadways' garbage. I fell for it for a few minutes, but as soon as the notion is examined with any seriousness, it falls apart. Government and crowdfunding would suggest it was a great idea though.
Development is a knotty ethical issue. How can we in all good faith start laying down the law to the developing world given our history and while we're sitting on our own massive dependence on hydro-carbons(?) But then again, economically and democratically speaking the West is in a far better position to lead by example than developing economies. We can also afford to take a bit of hit so that having a little bit less might mean developing nations can have quite a bit more and thus, with encouragement, be better able to implement the alternatives we are now turning to as they come along. We've gifted trillions to the financial sector to boost an maintain asset values that do little but suck money and resources out of the system - if we spent that on re-directing our infrastructure towards sustainability and giving others a leg up, well, we could finally begin to hold our heads up when the aliens arrive!Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:10 pmI think we need to also recognize that people want to develop their world. When people start lobbying the government to stop development in the Sahtu region, they are often from Vancouver. I say remediate Vancouver first. Those living in the Sahtu deserve infrastructure and development too. A 'better outcome for all' might lead a city-idiot to oppose development. Preserving a future for their Vancouver grandchildren at the expense of the families in the Sahtu Region.
![Very Happy! :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Tax law is so complex that in most developed societies the task of devising policy and drafting legislation is outsourced to the multinational accountancy firms - the people figuratively and literally over-invested in understanding and manipulating the complexity. This has definitely happened in the UK and we've seen it at work again in the US with the recent garbled and (it seems deliberately) disorganised 'tax reforms' pushed through by the GOP. So I wholeheartedly agree about the need for taxation to be simplified. I would also suggest that a lot more work could be done to re-associate the general concept of taxation with public goods rather than a reduction in individual incomes. A simple reform would be to simplify tax laws and cross-applicable exemptions by, say, calculating tax liability by a simple logarithmic scaled to earnings/profits. Perhaps..Cunt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:10 pmHere is another - stop complicated taxing. Ending the CRA (IRS in the states) by making tax simple enough for everyone to understand, then stop employing so many people, printers and associated administration 'carbon-costs'. Bet you won't find any government in favour of uncomplicated taxes. Mostly, they seem to favour making it more and more complex, requiring more and more tax lawyers, accountants and other 'carbon-heavy' features.
- y = 3x
... could be a good starting point, with income on the x axis, liability on the y, and where the relevant multiplier would remain a matter for policy but the third unit on the y axis would intersect the x axis at median earnings/profits. That would produce a truly progressive tax system at least. We can even ask Jim to help us refine the function before we write the proposal if you like - I think we can get him on board if we pay him in gin
![Very Happy! :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
- Seabass
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
- About me: Pluviophile
- Location: Covidiocracy
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Good lord. Fox News really has gone full Breitbart, hasn't it...
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
- pErvinalia
- On the good stuff
- Posts: 59357
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
- About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
- Location: dystopia
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Wasn't it always full Breitbart..?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.
- Seabass
- Posts: 7339
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
- About me: Pluviophile
- Location: Covidiocracy
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
I don't think so. Fox News has always been awful, but Breitbart can almost compete with Infowars in terms of insanity levels.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 73101
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Even more problematic stuff
Shit!Brian Peacock wrote:
I don't own a car and I haven't had the heating on for 8 years, or plugged the fridge in.
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
That's taking asceticism to extremes!
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
We've moved in some directions - some solar on the roof, rainwater tanks, growing a lot of our own veg. I try to limit my car use, and either walk where possible, of take the bus if it's to the city.
Abso-fuckin'-lutely!We can even ask Jim to help us refine the function before we write the proposal if you like - I think we can get him on board if we pay him in gin![]()
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests