Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
You realize Silasw that every single thing you mentioned got paid for with the success of my book. The press that printed it got paid. The bookstores that sold it had their own revenue go up.
The researchers who worked on the story got paid. The people who did the cover art got paid. And when the movie comes out with Will Smith as me, and Matt Damon as Wildcard, they'll be paid, as will the studio.
And the crux of the matter Silasw, is the the factory worker could do the same thing I did. Those resources weren't set aside for me, there in place for anybody who'll do it. Hell, let's say you read Starship and Wildcard and say "This fucking sucks. What idiot wrote this? I can do better."
And so you write a story about a rich troper who's taken by terrorists, escapes, and decides to fight crime in a suit of powered armor built in the shape of a bunny that launches easter egg missiles and you sell 20 million copies...well, that's just you using the same opportunities as I did.
Again, I'm very uncomfortable with this view of the rich as people who just sit around do nothing. (beat) Okay, a lot of them are, but not all of them.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:45:59 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorOkay say I'm rich. I got all that money and I worked hard to get it. After I have bought my mansion and it's just sitting in a vault why can't I give some of that money to taxes? I don't see a bad reason.
Space Nazis. In his hypothetical me and him wrote an action book about fighting space nazis.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:49:12 PM by Wildcard
![]()
![]()
Your book pays for the UN and for the relief of Haiti? No everything in my list is not paid for by the book, the shops and the people in them are. But the roads? The radio towers? The internet (as a whole, not the add space itself)? Your book doesn't pay for them on its own. Nor does it pay for the removal of trade sanction of Whereverthehelluzstan, that allow you to sell your book there.
Edit: Yep, and then I will have benefited from those additional benefits and as such I should pay a bit more. The benefits don't have to be set aside for you for you to benefit from them when the factory worker doesn't.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:51:00 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranA group of Nazis hatch a secret plan to take over all the banks, build overpriced condos, and force all Mexican immigrant women to be their harem.
But....they weren't counting on them.
One is a Soul Brotha with a bad attitude. The other is a liberal hippie with a badder attitude. Together....They fight Nazis.
So begins, The Adventures of Wildcard and Starship.
EDIT: In the sequel they take on the socialist rabbit, Silasw and his progressive taxes of DOOM!
edited 4th Apr '13 1:49:32 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorSorry I lost track of what was hypothetical and what we're actually talking about.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.Again, I am proud to pay the government for giving me the opporunities that helped me get to where I am.
But at a certain point, I don't want to keep paying for the right to earn my own goddamn money.
Part of the issue, is that I'm really toying with the idea.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:52:34 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honor![]()
Why not? You're only able to earn it because the government helps you, dam right you should keep paying for that service. It can only becomes your "goddamn money" (are you allowed to take dammed money into church?) because of the system, as long as you're gaining from the system you should pay towards its upkeep. The more you gain from the system the more you should pay to its upkeep.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:56:21 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranObama fundraiser brings in $3.2M for House Democrats
![]()
![]()
Not an answer.
You're not paying for the right to make money, you're paying for the system that helps you make money. It can only becomes your "goddamn money" (are you allowed to take dammed money into church?) because of the system, as long as you're gaining from the system you should pay towards its upkeep. The more you gain from the system the more you should pay to its upkeep.
Also, anyone else now getting a "written a book?" add?
Plus, I'm not a liberal, I'm a far left socialist who understands practicality. There's a difference.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:59:33 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
I recommend you read this
. It's long, but comprehensive.
The short version of how we can have protection without government is we do it ourselves. The longer version is, well, anarchism isn't exactly the lack of governance. It's the lack of a state and self-governance, so it isn't exactly without governance. How protection could be achieved could be two ways I can think of on the top of my head. First, a group of people will form a militia to respond to a threat and work together to figure out how to fight the threat. Second, the community will come together and vote to create a militia which people would volunteer for then work together to figure out how to fight the threat. Now, those are hardly the only ways this could happen, and there wouldn't need to be any way in particular that this would have to happen, but those are two ways I could think of that would work in an anarchist society.
Anarchy is impossible as long as there are people who know how to gain popularity and power. Simple as that. Protection is supposed to come in the form of "non aggression" principle that works only as long as no one gets angry over anything, or doesn't get their mood misinterpreted. Or drunk, or otherwise have their judgement impaired.
@Starship: having read the last few pages I have to say your logic seems to be going in a very weird circle. You keep saying "I should be able to keep my money" or something like it. Except that as it currently stands the poor and middle class can't keep their money. Taxing the rich more than we currently are, and cutting off loopholes (which we appear to all agree on here) would enable the poorer folks to actually also be able to keep their money, without impairing the rich all that much. (Logically there is only so much any one person can spend before it's just sitting there accumulating. Even when you're doing thinks like building a replica of elf houses from LOTR. And yes, someone has done that.) Might as well tax the rich a little more so that it can be put towards roads and schools and NASA because these things do have a benefit for everyone, and are in fact what enable you to make however much money is you make, seeing as we all need education to know how to make money and roads to be able to travel to work. And transportation. And people who know how to make the vehicles we use for transportation. And so forth. Edit: It's not about punishing the rich, which we've refuted nearly every time you've said it. (And this is getting frustrating that you keep claiming that, because there's only one person who's actually wanted to go all "eat the rich" on this forum and he's long since been banned, and none of us want to punish anyone who hasn't broken the law.) It's about thinking about the greater good of the larger group. And we need money from somewhere to achieve the greater good. It's not punishing the rich when we're willing to play by the rules we want to establish.
So it seems like you're agreeing with us while trying to disagree with us, and there's some reasoning going on in your head that I'm not understanding.
edited 4th Apr '13 2:15:20 PM by AceofSpades
Starship: After a point, you can't put a price on all the costs of a functioning society. How am I going to put a price on public education teaching the readers of your book how to read on the first place?
You do a functional analysis of the downsides to high taxation on the highest brackets and see where you get diminishing returns from taxing them and investing in their customer base versus letting them keep the money themselves and invest it. If the math says the optimal point is 40%, the optimal point is 40%. If the math says the optimal point is 70%, the optimal point is 70%. The optimal point is where the taxes are paying for the most support for the customer base that they can give the investors, which is good, because if you have more money and a crappier society to spend it in, you really have less money (need to spend more training undereducated workers, need to spend more on security to account for crime, your customers have less disposable income, etc.).
It's not about the number of dollars in your bank account; it's about the real economic leverage you have and the effectiveness of the society in which you can apply that leverage. Would you rather be the richest man in Sierra Leone, or the 1000th richest man in England?
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

But those means only exist for you to use because society provides and protects them. The guy working in a factory probably doesn't need much government beyond the state for him to have what he is, but you? You've benefited not just from your state, but also the federal government and the federal infrastructure, the federal infrastructure that built the roads that the trucks deliver your books drive on. The factory worker only benefits directly from the roads around his house. You're books sell not just because they are good, but because the government has built a basic infrastructure network that lets you talk about your book, that lets you advertise it on the internet, that lets it be shipped across the country via a postal service established by the federal government. Those are just some bits of help that you benefited from a lot more then the factory worker.
We can go into more if you want, your book is sold across the world, you benefit from trade agreements established by your government, your book can be sold in Haiti because your government helped to rebuilt it after the earthquake. How does the factory worker benefit financially from these things? Look at the internet, the factory worker gets the benefits of it giving him some fun and access to information, you benefit from it providing you with an instant way to sell your book to millions and to advertise it across the world, in additional to the leisure activity that the factory worker gets.
Then we go to the international level, the UN doesn't help the factory worker, but it bringing a peaceful resolution to the conflict in whaterstan means you have yet another market for your book. The fact that it runs an international postal system means your book can travel faster.
edited 4th Apr '13 1:34:47 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran