Criminal Krudd to hand over our wealth (2 Viewers)

[loquasagacious]

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.

I was indeed deeply hurt by your cutting observation....

The "squabbling" is in order to achieve something, don't you get that? You have to play the political game to get things done, to do some good.

Tip: read my 12:13AM post where I tacitly approved of democratic process.

That's democracy for you, the best there is. Would you rather a dictator who didn't muck around with people's rights or opinions, just got things done? They might not be good things but man they're efficient.

That's a straw man argument. Though I do broadly agree that the combination of people voting and the balance of enshrined protection of liberties is the best system there is. Within that umbrella though there are many permutations which are not ideal - the Australian system being just one of them.

Or would you put your entire existence at the mercy of "market forces" and the world of capitalism, without any regulation? With unpredictable results, subject to the desires of the business world, whose main motivation is to make money. It's not to help anyone, it's not to do what's right for a country, it's to make money.

Another straw man. And a clear misunderstanding of what markets actually do and how they actually operate.

Just because your perception of "good" differs from those of today's elected representatives, doesn't mean it's evil.

I don't believe I referred to them as evil or myself as good. Generally speaking I think that most people are good in that they are doing things which they genuinely believe are 'good things' which achieve good outcomes. However I also think that many of these people are misguided and incorrect in their perception of what a 'good thing' is. In other words they are well-meaning but mistaken. In contrast I believe that I am well-meaning and correct in my conclusions.

 

[redmayne]

The "you" was plural, directed at those more anti-government than you. More anti-reason than you.

Enter jennyfromdabloc.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

PM's pay: $330,000 pa

Sol Trujillo's pay: $11,000,000 pa (before $20,000,000 payout)

John Thain (Merrill Lynch CEO) pay: US$83,100,000

Rudd's wife is a multimillionaire from government contracts.

Most politicians also get lucrative private sector gigs (as a reward from their rent seeking pals) once they retire.

Money is not the only thing that corrupts people. Politicians may also be motivated by a lust for power.

Quoting pay figures at me does nothing to prove that politicians have purer motives for their actions.

Also, what is wrong with being motivated by money? Without the government, the only way to make a profit is by giving consumers what they want, this sounds like a good thing.

A desire for money is not equivalent to greed either. Look at the billions being donated by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet to charity. The two richest people on earth are actually giving away most of their fortunes.

 

[will-anal]

Um...?

Have you looked at the thread you're contributing to here?

Hey man, nice to see you there.

What's your point!

 

[will-anal]

I'm almost Libertarian except I believe there should be a basic level of government funded healthcare and education which is not sub par like it is atm.

Given that I think tax is shit, I'm not sure how they'd fund this, when I think healthcare I think 100% free meds like England, but I'm p sure the tax rate in England is fucking nuts.

I might investigate France for a moment, brb

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I'm almost Libertarian except I believe there should be a basic level of government funded healthcare and education which is not sub par like it is atm.

Given that I think tax is shit, I'm not sure how they'd fund this, when I think healthcare I think 100% free meds like England, but I'm p sure the tax rate in England is fucking nuts.

I might investigate France for a moment, brb

This used to be me.

Then I realised that government interference is what drives up the cost of education and healthcare by a huge factor, and that even poor people would be able to afford decent healthcare (as in at least as good as they get now) without government intervention.

Look how bad it is for the poor now. Do you really think the poor student forced to go to their local public schools in poor areas are getting a decent education?

 

[will-anal]

This used to be me.

Then I realised that government interference is what drives up the cost of education and healthcare by a huge factor, and that even poor people would be able to afford decent healthcare (as in at least as good as they get now) without government intervention.

Well yes, I guess so.

I've paid nearly 3k in tax this year already, if I didn't have to pay that tax I'd be able add that to my income and would not need subsidized health or education. Given I have private health insurance and that Nick will probably go to a private school, it's like I'm paying twice which is heaps gay imo tbh

 

[Lentern]

I can fight for freedom far more if I'm not locked away in prison

Yeah, not really worth fighting for then?

 

[Lentern]

This used to be me.

Then I realised that government interference is what drives up the cost of education and healthcare by a huge factor, and that even poor people would be able to afford decent healthcare (as in at least as good as they get now) without government intervention.

Look how bad it is for the poor now. Do you really think the poor student forced to go to their local public schools in poor areas are getting a decent education?

I object to your use of the term "realised". I implies now you actually know something.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I object to your use of the term "realised". I implies now you actually know something.

It's a basic fact, you subsidize something, you drive up the price.

 

[lala2]

I'm pretty undecided on this issue. I think it's a noble attempt by Rudd & Turnbull to do something about the environment (or maybe just boost their popularity), but I don't think it's the right way to go about it. I don't know what the right way (or a better way) is, but this isn't it. Though I think both leaders should be focusing on other more important things right now anyway.

 

[Lentern]

It's a basic fact, you subsidize something, you drive up the price.

It's a theory. Your free market mumbo jumbo is all theoretical as evidenced by your own admissions that no free market utopia has ever been realized especially not in the modern world where capital can cross national borders so quickly and easily.

 

[will-anal]

Serious question though
Monaco has no income tax. How's that working out for them? (I really have no idea but I believe Monaco has one of the highest living standards in the world??). I think the state still retains a monopoly on a lot of services?

France is a pretty good example though eh?

France's economy combines extensive private enterprise (nearly 2.5 million companies registered)[38][39] with substantial (though declining[40]) government intervention

, except they still tax heavily on incomes

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

It's a theory. Your free market mumbo jumbo is all theoretical as evidenced by your own admissions that no free market utopia has ever been realized especially not in the modern world where capital can cross national borders so quickly and easily.

We don't need a "free market utopia" to exist to observe that subsidies drive up prices.

 

[ComingUpForAir]

if the economic transaction has a benificial spillover, then a subsidy is warranted

 

[0bs3n3]

Opposition should oppose it outright, at least that way they won't be tainted come next election. Lack of effective conservatives ftl. Barnaby Joyce is the only one I trust.

 

[SylviaB]

Yeah, not really worth fighting for then?

so you think that an effective way of fighting for freedom is to essentially allow the government to take away practically all it?

like I've already said, it's not that I don't believe in freedom enough to do it, it's just that it's a very poor way of fighting for it

like tax evasion for example, if a whole bunch of libertarians all hide income and get caught, then they'll if anything they'll just remove more freedoms and make things even stricter, achieving the opposite of what you were hoping to

 

[Lentern]

so you think that an effective way of fighting for freedom is to essentially allow the government to take away practically all it?

like I've already said, it's not that I don't believe in freedom enough to do it, it's just that it's a very poor way of fighting for it

like tax evasion for example, if a whole bunch of libertarians all hide income and get caught, then they'll if anything they'll just remove more freedoms and make things even stricter, achieving the opposite of what you were hoping to

Well the Charlie Perkins strategy of defying the rules seemed to achieve more than yours. Just saying. Not really worth fighting for

 

[SylviaB]

Well the Charlie Perkins strategy of defying the rules seemed to achieve more than yours. Just saying. Not really worth fighting for

fuck you're retarded

 

[Lentern]

fuck you're retarded

I keep thinking of that quote from the nutter that you people always seem to worship. Franklin I think, something like those who would give up essentially liberty to buy a little temporary protection deserve neither?