The Hofoid House of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VII

[WritOfCertiorari]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

Vegetables and fungi are also species. Every species other than autotrophs has to eat or decompose other species to survive. Please take a biology class before you start spewing nonsense on this board.

[WritOfCertiorari]

Professor Solid gives us a lecture about finance and the English language, neither of which he understands at even a basic level. This guy thinks people who choose to buy stock are being "enslaved", for God's sake.

Honestly, you could pretty much put any Solid post in here, but we need to try and save some bandwidth here.

I am probably in the minority here, but I believe that the disincentive towards investment caused by capital gains taxes is a good thing, and that the lower investment levels are desirable.

I think we need heavy taxation on stocks, bonds, and dividends to ensure that people cannot simply make money through them faster than they will ever need to spend it, provided that they are already wealthy at the start, so that those people actually have to get a job instead of being able to never have to work a hard day in their life.

I am probably in the minority here, but I believe that the disincentive towards investment caused by capital gains taxes is a good thing, and that the lower investment levels are desirable.

I think we need heavy taxation on stocks, bonds, and dividends to ensure that people cannot simply make money through them faster than they will ever need to spend it, provided that they are already wealthy at the start, so that those people actually have to get a job instead of being able to never have to work a hard day in their life.

Uh... why should somebody “have” to get a job if they are already rich?

Because the only reason why they are rich in the 1st place is because they got lucky.

Also payroll taxes need to be abolished, since they disproportionately affect the poor.

Really, the way investment is set up, it is somewhat of a watered down version of slavery with the investors at the top being effective slave owners, and everyone else effective slaves.

I am probably in the minority here, but I believe that the disincentive towards investment caused by capital gains taxes is a good thing, and that the lower investment levels are desirable.

I think we need heavy taxation on stocks, bonds, and dividends to ensure that people cannot simply make money through them faster than they will ever need to spend it, provided that they are already wealthy at the start, so that those people actually have to get a job instead of being able to never have to work a hard day in their life.

Investment is not just numbers on a page- it’s a liaison between those who require capital, and those who can lend them money to buy it.

Instead of having a draconian investment system in society, we need to have higher taxes on the rich, and higher spending on government programs to help the poor.

[WritOfCertiorari]

No, I was saying that the workers were basically slaves to the investors, since the money investors make from the stock market was basically money that should have been included in the workers salary.

Then there wouldn't be any investors... meaning there wouldn't be any money. How do you not understand that?

The money that people make in the stock market has nothing to do with the company itself, at least after the IPO. It's all traded between individuals who are attempting to make a profit off of the movement of the stock price. If that money were "given to the workers", no one would participate in this transaction, and the share price would be zero, defeating the entire purpose of your proposal.

What you need to realize that you aren't owed anything other than your salary and benefits when you work for a company. It's not slavery because you are choosing to accept or decline the terms of a contract, which means you have ownership of your labor. A slave is someone who is forced to perform labor regardless of what they get in return.

Ironically, you are the one advocating slavery! You want to mandate how much money someone can make off their own transactions, even to the point of total redistribution. You are probably even okay with stealing money from one person to bribe another, which I'm assuming you want to do for votes in the next election or something. This has nothing to do with the well being of workers, at all- its just a vendetta against people who have more money than you do.

Listen, capitalism has been messed up for some time now. Socialists have been making valid arguments for years. But a smart socialist would realize that the financial sector is going to be necessary one way or another, most likely through the state in that scenario. Whatever you call it, disincentivising it is a recipe for stagnation.