Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1177842 - 12/29/02 05:51 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Thor writes:

Did you know the wealth of the .1% of the US has gone up 150% in the last 30 years...

So what? How has that harmed the poor? Did that top 0.1% take it from them? Were taxes on the poor increased and the proceeds given to the top 0.1%?

Only a few make it while the rest, the vast majority are struggling to make ends meet...

So sorry, but this is simply untrue. A simple majority of the people in the US would be 145 million people. A vast majority would be, what, 170 million or so? There are not even close to 145 million "struggling to make ends meet".

Around 50 million people living in poverty!

Again, simply not true. There are nowhere close to even half that amount living in "poverty" in the US. If you provide us the link that you took that figure from, I'll show you the flawed methodology used to arrive at that bogus figure... IF the site in question has the guts to provide the methodology. Most don't.

In countries like Canada we have a support system that allows people to get back on their feet, in the US welfare is a trap that has been shown to give little hope of people getting out of it.

Welfare is welfare. It traps people in Canada as thoroughly as it traps those in the US. A relative of mine has been on welfare for over twelve years now. He is of sound mind and body, and is perfectly capable of working for himself... he has done so with no difficulty in the past. The thing is, he is lazy and his wants are few. Welfare provides him a decent apartment, enough for food and clothing and medical expenses. His point of view is "Why work? I've got all I need." He has a TV, cable, a phone, a computer, a bus pass, good quality clothing, as much dope as he cares to smoke. He has enough to buy cigarettes at $8.29 Canadian a pack.

What about 50 million people not having healthcare??

Define "healthcare". No one in need of hospitalization in the US can be turned away. That is the law. As Evolving has pointed out here several times in the past, many of those 50 million CHOOSE to go without health plans.

Health care should be a right that all free people enjoy, because while most people can afford to pay into a health care system, those who can't shouldn't be left out.

Socialized medicine is one of the biggest follies of the Twentieth century and you as a Canadian resident should be more aware of that than anyone. Report after report after expensive report has demonstrated that, just in reference to Canada, let alone in England and Europe.

Don't get me started on how healthcare for profit also causes a lot of ethical problems with people's care coming second to the all mighty dollar.

Ethical? Please explain to us how it is ethical for a single healthy male in his twenties to be forced to pay the medical bills for a family in Newfoundland with eight kids?

But enough digression... back to the topic at hand.

Americans as a group are statistically more violent than Canadians as a group, guns or no guns. As Moore himself points out, even if you ignore every single gun fatality in the US, there is still a much higher homicide rate than in almost any other country. Why is that? Moore says it is because there is a climate of fear in the US that isn't there in other countries. That is hogwash. The people who are murdering others aren't people who live in fear that their child will be kidnapped or that their homes will be burglarized or their cars stolen or their daughters raped. It's a statistical fact that most homicide victims are killed by those known to them; family, friends, acquaintances, co-workers. What does "fear" have to do with those murders? Nothing whatsoever.

So WHY is there this violent streak in the American psyche? Some argue it is the glorification of the "bad boys" in American culture; the hero-worship of such miscreants as Bonnie and Clyde, Billy the Kid, etc. fueled by Hollywood and television and pulp novels and Rap music. Others argue it is due to the courts and prison system being too lenient. Others argue it is due to the War on Drugs. In my opinion, all of the above have some validity, and taken together go a long way towards explaining it.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Phred]
    #1177955 - 12/29/02 06:48 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

So what? How has that harmed the poor? Did that top 0.1% take it from them? Were taxes on the poor increased and the proceeds given to the top 0.1%?



No but the reality of the American dream is that much of the wealth of America is in a tiny group of its citizens. Its not much different than its been in the UK for centuries with money staying within that group of the super wealthy. Does it hurt the poor? Thats not easy to say, but my problem is with how their system that allows for such a small proportion of the people to have a large chunk of the wealth to also allow so many people to be living in poverty.

I'm a Democratic Socialist, so I see that the wealth in the US is much like the old Lords and peasants type system in the UK.. Its just with the US the peasants have nice digs and cars..

Quote:

So sorry, but this is simply untrue. A simple majority of the people in the US would be 145 million people. A vast majority would be, what, 170 million or so? There are not even close to 145 million "struggling to make ends meet".



So you deny that since the hayday of the middle class in the US, the 50's-60's; that in those days only the father had to work a decent job to pay for all the food, mortgage, car, etc... Now today most parents both have to work because the costs of living continue to grow while the middle class wages have been moving slowly upward...

Its pretty much obvious that the middle class today has to work much more to make ends meet, and in many cases two full time jobs in one household are just barely enough to live off of.

Quote:

Again, simply not true. There are nowhere close to even half that amount living in "poverty" in the US. If you provide us the link that you took that figure from, I'll show you the flawed methodology used to arrive at that bogus figure... IF the site in question has the guts to provide the methodology. Most don't.




Sorry 50 million was too high, but here is the facts according to the US Census beuro which obviously has the guts to provide the methodology :wink:

"The Census Bureau said the number of poor Americans rose last year to 32.9 million, an increase of 1.3 million, while the proportion living in poverty rose to 11.7 percent, from 11.3 percent in 2000."
Number of People Living in Poverty Increases in U.S.

Quote:

Welfare is welfare. It traps people in Canada as thoroughly as it traps those in the US. A relative of mine has been on welfare for over twelve years now. He is of sound mind and body, and is perfectly capable of working for himself... he has done so with no difficulty in the past. The thing is, he is lazy and his wants are few. Welfare provides him a decent apartment, enough for food and clothing and medical expenses. His point of view is "Why work? I've got all I need." He has a TV, cable, a phone, a computer, a bus pass, good quality clothing, as much dope as he cares to smoke. He has enough to buy cigarettes at $8.29 Canadian a pack.



I don't disagree with you there, however the Canadian system offers a lot more support for those willing to work out of welfare.. There will always be those who don't want to make the effort, but for those who do they have a great deal more resources available to them in Canada then they do in the US..

Quote:

Define "healthcare". No one in need of hospitalization in the US can be turned away. That is the law. As Evolving has pointed out here several times in the past, many of those 50 million CHOOSE to go without health plans.



Can't be turned away, of course.. But they have to pay for their expenses right? If a person can't afford a health policy then I doubt they could afford to pay their bills for an emergency that could occur. Am I misunderstanding you here?

They don't choose it? Why is that, do they think that if they get sick that they can afford tens of thousands of dollar health bills?

Quote:

Socialized medicine is one of the biggest follies of the Twentieth century and you as a Canadian resident should be more aware of that than anyone. Report after report after expensive report has demonstrated that, just in reference to Canada, let alone in England and Europe.



At its worst our health care system still puts many to shame.. Is it flawed, hell yes.. We need to reform our system and improve upon it.. Don't forget I came from Iceland in which it shares a similar system to Sweden in regards to health care.. Those countries have top notch health care, and yes the citizenry pays for it thanks to higher taxes..

But again this is something I like, because I do care about people living in the street or struggling in some slum.. Anyone who gets sick should have the help available to them, and maybe thats why I most dislike the US way.

Quote:

Ethical? Please explain to us how it is ethical for a single healthy male in his twenties to be forced to pay the medical bills for a family in Newfoundland with eight kids?



Because I'm a decent human being. I care about my fellow man, so why is that hard to understand? If you care only about yourself and your family; be damned the rest then its your right.. But I get bothered by lack of empathy for people in need.

I find it sad to see good people suffering when we have so much wealth.

Quote:

Americans as a group are statistically more violent than Canadians as a group, guns or no guns. As Moore himself points out, even if you ignore every single gun fatality in the US, there is still a much higher homicide rate than in almost any other country. Why is that? Moore says it is because there is a climate of fear in the US that isn't there in other countries. That is hogwash. The people who are murdering others aren't people who live in fear that their child will be kidnapped or that their homes will be burglarized or their cars stolen or their daughters raped. It's a statistical fact that most homicide victims are killed by those known to them; family, friends, acquaintances, co-workers. What does "fear" have to do with those murders? Nothing whatsoever.



I think you miss that point as well, it isn't anything as simple as fear, its the 'societal attitude' that is fueled with fear and mistrust.. The way the US runs its country for example shows by example that a solution to a problem is often dropping bombs, while most other countries try to solve problems with diplomatic and human means.

Is Moore dead on with his theory, probably not, but does he bring up some excellent points, yes.. The attitude is the thing that seperates the US from all western countries..

I'm sorry but I think fear definately plays a big part of the US.. Everyone locks their homes, watches the TV news showing a new murder, rape, kidnapping.. Daily doses of this, then of course you add CNN 24hr live coverage of a sniper on the loose. You think that doesn't instill fear??

Come on, its obvious that it does.. If you think of your home as a fortress with you gun under your pillow and alarm on the house, doesn't it envoke a shell shock attitude that a sound outside is going to be some criminal coming to kill you?

The attitude in Canada is much different don't you think?

Quote:

So WHY is there this violent streak in the American psyche? Some argue it is the glorification of the "bad boys" in American culture; the hero-worship of such miscreants as Bonnie and Clyde, Billy the Kid, etc. fueled by Hollywood and television and pulp novels and Rap music. Others argue it is due to the courts and prison system being too lenient. Others argue it is due to the War on Drugs. In my opinion, all of the above have some validity, and taken together go a long way towards explaining it.



I do agree to a point, but really I think the major factor is the media and how it plays to the fear of the country..

I mean if the past dictated the future then why isn't Germany a country that allowed the death of over 6 million jews is full of murders today?

I do agree though its not a simple answer like 'fear' 'media' etc. Its obvious however that in the US the attitude of the nation is very much the thing that causes such high murder rates as compared to other western nations. 


Edited by Thor (12/29/02 06:55 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1177976 - 12/29/02 07:09 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Posted by Thor:
Are Canadians not free? British? German? Australians? Swedes? We all share freedom as a common theme, but our form of society is what is different.



The British, Germans, and Australians are not free. Canadians are free, for now. Americans are quickly throwing away their freedom as your people are, trading it for the illusion of saftey. Your central government is registering all firearms as we converse here. Within a few years they will be confiscated. You and your countrymen will lose your freedom as did the British, Australians, and Germans. It is ludicrous to think that a free man must ask permission to bear arms or possess the means to defend his life, land, and family.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1177981 - 12/29/02 07:13 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

Posted by Thor:
Are Canadians not free? British? German? Australians? Swedes? We all share freedom as a common theme, but our form of society is what is different.



The British, Germans, and Australians are not free. Canadians are free, for now. Americans are quickly throwing away their freedom as your people are, trading it for the illusion of saftey. Your central government is registering all firearms as we converse here. Within a few years they will be confiscated. You and your countrymen will lose your freedom as did the British, Australians, and Germans. It is ludicrous to think that a free man must ask permission to bear arms or possess the means to defend his life, land, and family.




But you define freedom as a right to own a gun, not me.

Canada will not ban firearms, this is a gun loving nation of hunters..

Why do you define freedom by the right to own a gun?

Also yes America is losing their real freedoms thanks to guess what, fear of terrorism... The patriot act is a real gem of taking away a US citizen's rights.

Why aren't you all fighting this?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSkikid16
fungus fan

Registered: 06/27/02
Posts: 5,666
Loc: In the middle of the nort...
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1177995 - 12/29/02 07:22 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Why aren't you all fighting this?


Its too scary to dissent these days.


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Skikid16]
    #1177999 - 12/29/02 07:24 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

Why aren't you all fighting this?


Its too scary to dissent these days.




Very true, under the Patriot act simply protesting for whatever reason is enough for them to investigate you.

When I read the patriot act I was litterally shocked at how much power it gives to the government and law enforcement.

But American media doesn't cover this? Why are all these intelligent Americans not furious?

The only reason I can guess is that they accept it, thinking that removing freedoms from them will make them safer from terrorism (gotta love fear if you are a polititian).


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1178056 - 12/29/02 07:47 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

>>>>Canada will not ban firearms, this is a gun loving nation of hunters..

Look at the UK. Every regulation, every safe storage law, every extra bit of record keeping, registraton is nothing but a precurser to confiscation. Look at the UK, take a good hard look and tell me if you see history repeating itself in Canada now!

>>>>Why do you define freedom by the right to own a gun?

The right to bear arms ensures all the other rights. The rights to assemble, worship, protest, distribute literature, and not have a police state is nill withoutout a strong right arm to stick up. If you look at all the subjegated people throughout history they have somthing in common. They were weak and incapable or unwilling to adaquatly defend themselves and their land. It's no coincidence.

>>>>Why aren't you all fighting this?

The USA PATRIOT Act was a real gem... If freedom is a tall building the PATRIOT Act is like a wrecking ball in the side of it. These homeland security laws are destroying America's freedom. I don't consent to it. I haven't consented to the Federal Gov for several years. I specifically remember when I silently withdrew my consent from the Government was in May 2000.

Unfortunatly too many people are more concerned with having temporary saftey that they don't realize what they're purchasing with their freedom is an illusion, just a pipe dream. Thousands of men gave their lives for me to have freedom and I will in no ways give it over to any central government except over my dead body. If they want my arms they'll take out of my cold dead hands. I'm serious I'll have to be dead to give up me freedom, I'll give up the ghost before my freedom, I'll fight to keep it, as thousands of men have before me.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1178177 - 12/29/02 08:33 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Look at the UK. Every regulation, every safe storage law, every extra bit of record keeping, registraton is nothing but a precurser to confiscation. Look at the UK, take a good hard look and tell me if you see history repeating itself in Canada now!



I will definately do just that, honestly if that is the road we are heading down; there is still time for us to stop it right?

Quote:

The right to bear arms ensures all the other rights. The rights to assemble, worship, protest, distribute literature, and not have a police state is nill withoutout a strong right arm to stick up. If you look at all the subjegated people throughout history they have somthing in common. They were weak and incapable or unwilling to adaquatly defend themselves and their land. It's no coincidence.



I ususally believe that if you ignore history that it will repeat itself. But I honestly don't see the US or Canada turning into police state's or dictatorships.

I don't see the need for guns to protect myself from the government, I leave my defense of my rights to my mind and the power of democracy to protect what I cherish.

Quote:

The USA PATRIOT Act was a real gem... If freedom is a tall building the PATRIOT Act is like a wrecking ball in the side of it. These homeland security laws are destroying America's freedom. I don't consent to it. I haven't consented to the Federal Gov for several years. I specifically remember when I silently withdrew my consent from the Government was in May 2000.

Unfortunatly too many people are more concerned with having temporary saftey that they don't realize what they're purchasing with their freedom is an illusion, just a pipe dream. Thousands of men gave their lives for me to have freedom and I will in no ways give it over to any central government except over my dead body. If they want my arms they'll take out of my cold dead hands. I'm serious I'll have to be dead to give up me freedom, I'll give up the ghost before my freedom, I'll fight to keep it, as thousands of men have before me.




We can agree on this 100%, its very sad to see a great nation like the US see a law passed like the patriot act.. Shows just how ignorant the masses can be in a modern country.. If it can happen there, it can happen anywhere.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1178193 - 12/29/02 08:40 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Thor writes:

Its pretty much obvious that the middle class today has to work much more to make ends meet, and in many cases two full time jobs in one household are just barely enough to live off of.

Not according to the Census Bureau data you linked. The MEDIAN household income (not the average, mind you... the median) is now $42,228. That means that the majority of US households make more than $42,227 annually. I have a hard time calling that "struggling to make ends meet."

Can't be turned away, of course.. But they have to pay for their expenses right? If a person can't afford a health policy then I doubt they could afford to pay their bills for an emergency that could occur. Am I misunderstanding you here?

If they can pay, the hospital has the right to try to collect for treatment. If they can't, the hospital is shit out of luck. Evolving provided links to the specific legislation that covers this point a while back.

They don't choose it? Why is that, do they think that if they get sick that they can afford tens of thousands of dollar health bills?

Why do people not get insurance on their houses or apartments? Why do people not buy life insurance? Because they are taking the calculated risk that the amount they will need to pay to cover loss in the event of a burglary or a fire will be less than the cost of paying the insurance premiums. And, statistically speaking, that is a safe bet. If it were not the case, insurance companies would rapidly go bankrupt. Note that this is true only STATISTICALLY -- if you get hit by a bus and shatter eight bones and rupture your spleen tomorrow, then you are better off with good medical insurance.

But again this is something I like, because I do care about people living in the street or struggling in some slum...

As do I. I have no problem with contributing to the United Way or to handing money directly to those in need. I do have a problem with being taxed to pay for bums like the relative I mentioned, or to cover the costs of an emergency room visit by some chucklehead with the sniffles. "Compassion" at the point of a gun is not compassion at all.

Because I'm a decent human being. I care about my fellow man, so why is that hard to understand? If you care only about yourself and your family; be damned the rest then its your right.. But I get bothered by lack of empathy for people in need.

See above. You can't legislate empathy. As a matter of fact, there is a statistical correlation between how much money governments spend on social programs and the level of private donations to charities.

Everyone locks their homes...

You Canadians don't lock yours? I sure did when I was living in Canada.

You think that doesn't instill fear??

It doesn't instill fear, it provides a reality check. Let's face it, there are predators out there. Even if it does instill "fear", my point is that it is not the fearful who are killing people, it is the predators; those who have no fear of their victims and in most cases no real fear of the judicial system either.

If you think of your home as a fortress with you gun under your pillow and alarm on the house, doesn't it envoke a shell shock attitude that a sound outside is going to be some criminal coming to kill you?

How many homicides and violent crimes are committed by people who live as you describe? One per cent, tops? I repeat, it is not the fearful who rack up the big numbers in the area of crimes against persons.

I mean if the past dictated the future then why isn't Germany a country that allowed the death of over 6 million jews is full of murders today?

Germany doesn't glorify the excesses of Nazi Germany in film and print. They are ashamed of it.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Phred]
    #1178262 - 12/29/02 09:10 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Not according to the Census Bureau data you linked. The MEDIAN household income (not the average, mind you... the median) is now $42,228. That means that the majority of US households make more than $42,227 annually. I have a hard time calling that "struggling to make ends meet."



Compare that household income to what it costs for an average family to live in the middle class bracket.. I'll try to dig up some numbers later, but even though that sounds like a decent amount of money; the problem is still that it isn't exactly living comfortably..

Quote:

If they can pay, the hospital has the right to try to collect for treatment. If they can't, the hospital is shit out of luck. Evolving provided links to the specific legislation that covers this point a while back.



Hmmm, well I'll search for that and read more about it. It still is the situation that if you have no health care coverage and end up needing an operation then yeah whatever money you may have or property you may own will be gone. Add another person into the indigent catagory.

Quote:

Why do people not get insurance on their houses or apartments? Why do people not buy life insurance? Because they are taking the calculated risk that the amount they will need to pay to cover loss in the event of a burglary or a fire will be less than the cost of paying the insurance premiums. And, statistically speaking, that is a safe bet. If it were not the case, insurance companies would rapidly go bankrupt. Note that this is true only STATISTICALLY -- if you get hit by a bus and shatter eight bones and rupture your spleen tomorrow, then you are better off with good medical insurance.




Well I'd think most people who don't pay for health insurance in the US can't afford it. Of course there are those who take the risk, but I doubt anyone would sleep well knowing an illness could cost them their home, etc...

Quote:

As do I. I have no problem with contributing to the United Way or to handing money directly to those in need. I do have a problem with being taxed to pay for bums like the relative I mentioned, or to cover the costs of an emergency room visit by some chucklehead with the sniffles. "Compassion" at the point of a gun is not compassion at all.




Have you ever done any volunteer work for soup kitchens, etc?? You'll find most people fit into the catagory of down on their luck.. The bums you speak of who'm could care less about trying anymore are often mentally handicapped, or have a alcohol/drug problems.. The rest are people just trying to get back on their feet.

If a few bums get our support while most of the good people get support as well; then I'm happy to do it. If we left the generosity of humans to be the only source of charity in a society where greed is king; well there would be a lot more homeless people.

Quote:

See above. You can't legislate empathy. As a matter of fact, there is a statistical correlation between how much money governments spend on social programs and the level of private donations to charities.



So are you suggesting we remove the social net the government provides? Rely on charities only?

Quote:

You Canadians don't lock yours? I sure did when I was living in Canada.



I'm Icelandic :wink: But yeah I lock my door, mostly because I treat it like a seatbelt, even though the odds are I'm not going to have to worry about break-ins, I still do it cause why not?

But I don't worry about crime in my neighbourhood, it rarely crosses my mind because its just so unlikely to happen to me.

Quote:

It doesn't instill fear, it provides a reality check. Let's face it, there are predators out there. Even if it does instill "fear", my point is that it is not the fearful who are killing people, it is the predators; those who have no fear of their victims and in most cases no real fear of the judicial system either.



I don't agree, criminology would say that its often fear, rage, hate, revenge that causes most violent crime.. Crimes of passion are the common ones, crimes where the criminal is devoid of passion are the ones the FBI ends up dealing with. Those who have no fear of the victims or consequences are often the people we see committ serial crimes..

Quote:

How many homicides and violent crimes are committed by people who live as you describe? One per cent, tops? I repeat, it is not the fearful who rack up the big numbers in the area of crimes against persons.



1 percent? I doubt that highly, most murders are committed by people you know, so that leans towards crimes committed by hate, anger, jealousy, revenge, etc.. Fear definately contributes to that atmosphere..

Quote:

Germany doesn't glorify the excesses of Nazi Germany in film and print. They are ashamed of it.



Yeah but we are speaking of a violent past in a country like the US affecting attitudes today.. Well any country you can bring up has a violent past.. 


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1178280 - 12/29/02 09:20 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

I'm a Democratic Socialist, so I see that the wealth in the US is much like the old Lords and peasants type system in the UK.. Its just with the US the peasants have nice digs and cars..



If someone owns propertyand has nice digs and cars then why would they be called a peasant. I'de call them a citizen.

Quote:

Its pretty much obvious that the middle class today has to work much more to make ends meet, and in many cases two full time jobs in one household are just barely enough to live off of.



This is completely true. Since the early 70's if you take inflation in to consideration in to account incomes have dramatically dropped, well over 15%. I think this supply and demand explains this phenonema. Females entered the workforce in masses dumping huge quantities of labor in to the workforce and creating an incredible increase in labor supply while demand hasen't increased as much. Te result is lower pay for all the the necessity for many families to old two jobs. It's definatly debatable but I don't think this would have occured if woman would have stayed at home in traditional families.

Quote:

Define "healthcare". No one in need of hospitalization in the US can be turned away. That is the law. As Evolving has pointed out here several times in the past, many of those 50 million CHOOSE to go without health plans.



Lots of people are turned away from health care in the US. You need money or you're out of luck. FOr example I have carpal tunnel. If I didn't have insurance I couldn't go to any hospital ER and have them operate on me. They could care less. If you don't have the money they don't have the time. I however have insurance and I'll wait until summer to have my carpal tunnel fixed, nice to have that option.

Quote:

Not according to the Census Bureau data you linked. The MEDIAN household income (not the average, mind you... the median) is now $42,228. That means that the majority of US households make more than $42,227 annually. I have a hard time calling that "struggling to make ends meet."



The key phrase there is household income. That generally denotes more than one working person. This is typically a married couple working for 20K each and it adds up to 40K. This is not a good job. It's struggeling with two people balancing work, family, their kids school, and daycare. It's tough for working people like that to make ends meet. You just don't understand that people are making a lot less today than they were 30 years ago.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleThorA
Anti-Theist OVERLORD
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/12/98
Posts: 9,982
Loc: Iceland
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1178296 - 12/29/02 09:27 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

If someone owns propertyand has nice digs and cars then why would they be called a peasant. I'de call them a citizen.



I don't mean literally by definition, I mean to me the names are definitions have changed, but the class structure is still as strong as it ever was.

The peasants or citizen is just much better off now and with more oppertunities.. But the lords/ladies or super wealthy class still thrive in many western worlds where old money continues to grow steadilly.

The rich keep getting richer, and yes at the expense of the poor and middle class. :smile:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Phred]
    #1178366 - 12/29/02 10:30 PM (18 years, 9 months ago)

So what? How has that harmed the poor? Did that top 0.1% take it from them? Were taxes on the poor increased and the proceeds given to the top 0.1%?

Yep. The average taxpayer pays $400 to welfare for the poor and $1400 for corporate welfare.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Thor]
    #1178699 - 12/30/02 04:49 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)


Its pretty much obvious that the middle class today has to work much more to make ends meet, and in many cases two full time jobs in one household are just barely enough to live off of.

The reason that the members of the middle class find themselves having problems
making ends meet, is because most of them live far beyond their means. They are
not like the middle class of yore who had a small house and one car. They have
two or three vehicles(usually SUV's), a TV in every room, a swimming pool, tons
of designer clothes, and mountains of credit card debt. If the people in
America were capable of managing their money better, there would not be
as many people "struggling".

For example, I know someone who earns $7.00 an hour and constantly
complains how it is so hard to make ends meet(he even has to have to his Mom
pay his car insurance for him), and how it is a travesty for the American worker.
Yet, he doesn't admit that he spends at least $300 a month on marijuana, at least
$50 a month on guitar related stuff, at least $50 a month on cable television, and
whenever he gets the slightest amount of money saved up, he blows it on a
new tattoo or a toy of some kind.


I don't disagree with you there, however the Canadian system offers a lot more support for those willing to work out of welfare..

President Clinton reformed welfare during his administration. He said that
people were no longer allowed to live on it for life. And, he instituted
programs designed to help wean people off of welfare. Welfare to work
programs they are called(of course, I have repeatedly heard Micheal Moore
criticize these programs).


There will always be those who don't want to make the effort, but for those who do they have a great deal more resources available to them in Canada then they do in the US..

In America you can get student loans that are interest-free, for post-secondary
education. This is a great resource available to people wishing to improve
their lot in life.


Because I'm a decent human being. I care about my fellow man, so why is that hard to understand? If you care only about yourself and your family; be damned the rest then its your right..

If the have-nots of the world concern you, then by all means do whatever you
wish to help them. But, don't force my hand or my resources to do it.


Come on, its obvious that it does.. If you think of your home as a fortress with you gun under your pillow and alarm on the house, doesn't it envoke a shell shock attitude that a sound outside is going to be some criminal coming to kill you?

Unfortunately, America(and the world for that matter) has a large amount of
people who have no respect for their fellow man's bodies or property. These
people steal and inflict damage upon things. It is not "paranoia" to recognize
the simple fact that people like this do exist, and that it is wise to take precautions
against them.


RandalFlagg



Edited by RandalFlagg (12/30/02 04:52 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Xlea321]
    #1178778 - 12/30/02 05:25 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Yep. The average taxpayer pays $400 to welfare for the poor and $1400 for corporate welfare.



Actually, the lower wage earners in the US pay little to no taxes.

19.3 million claimed the earned income credit.
32.3 BILLION was given out with this credit.

In case you are unaware, the earned income credit is (despite the name) a handout given to lower earning taxpayers who couldn't be bothered to keep it in thier pants. The more kids you have the larger the credit.


Share of the Income Taxes Paid, by Income Earned.
Percent of Federal Individual Income Taxes Paid by High and Low Income Taxpayers, 1979 and 1989
Income Group.....1979.........1989
Highest 5%.........37.6%.......43.6%
Highest 10%.......49.5%.......54.5%
Highest 25%.......73.1%.......76.5%
Highest 50%.......93.2%.......93.9%
Lowest 50%........6.8%.........6.1%
Lowest 25%........0.5%.........0.7%
Source: Information Please Almanac, page 75. (1991)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Excerpts from the text following the above table in the Information Please almanac:

Top Wage Earners Still Pay Largest Share of Income Tax Bill

The top-earning ten percent of US taxpayers paid nearly 55% of the Federal individual income tax bill in 1989, according to a Tax foundation analysis fo the recently released 1989 IRS tax return data. Despite all the major tax legislation witnessed over the decade of the 1980s, the fraction of income taxes collected for this top ten percent varied only slightly from year to year between 1979 and 1989 but inched steadily up during the decade.... [emphasis added]

Trends in Progressivity

The Federal income tax system has remained progressive. Top earners continue to pay a larger share of tax collections despite the alleged upper-income bias of the tax cuts and rate reductions under ERTA of 1981 and TRA of 1986. [emphasis ours --Web Team One]
Growth in the income base itself has been increasing faster at the upper end of the income scale, resulting in increased income tax receipts from top earners. Naturally, this also results in a higher proportion of the entire population's income being taxed at the highest rate.

The 112 million returns filed for tax year 1989 reported an increase in AGI (adjusted gross income) of $194 billion over 1988. The largest percentage gain was from Individual Retirement Account distributions, up 24.3% from 1988. [emphasis ours --Web Team One] Social Security benefits rose 22.4%, and taxable interest increased 15.5%. Salries and wages, which constituted 71.6% of total positive income for 1989, rose 5.5% over 1988. All told, 1989 total individual income taxes rose $23.3 billion over 1988 for a record $439 billion take.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How Much More?
Liberals insist that the rich paid less, despite the facts (above) to the contrary. Below is the breakdown of how much more the rich were paying at the end of the 1980s than at the beginning.


Taxpayers earning over $200,000
.............................1980..................1988
Tax rate..................70%..................28%
Number of returns....117,000.............725,000
Dollars paid............$19.5 billion.......$100.3 billion
Percent of income....7.5%.................25.3%
Total taxes.............$250.3 billion.....$412.9 billion

Percent paid by groups
.......................1980.........1988
$0-20K............19.5%.........7.0%
20-50K............49.4%........30.4%
50-200K..........23.6%........38.3%
200K+.............7.5%.........24.3%
Source: Internal Revenue Statistics published in Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Oct 12, 1992.
There you have it. The "evil rich" went from paying less than 8% of the total taxes to paying a quarter of them. For those making $20k and less, the share of taxes fell from 20% to 7%. And that is the true story. If you want a true period of the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor, you have to go back to the Carter years.




--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1178790 - 12/30/02 05:34 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Here's a link for the 2001 figures.
http://www.cato.org/research/fiscal_policy/2002/factsfigs.html


Pay special attention to this chart.
Share of Federal Taxes Paid by Income Group, 2001 (Includes Individual Income, Payroll, and Excise Taxes)

And this one...
Share of Federal Individual Income Taxes Paid by Income Group, 1999


The top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of Federal income taxes.

The top 1% pay 36% of Federal income tax.

But please.... don't ever let facts stand in the way!!!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Edited by luvdemshrooms (12/30/02 05:43 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 month, 14 days
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1178871 - 12/30/02 06:28 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

I don't see why you people argue constantly over this gun issue. Guns don't make America free! America hasn't been a free country for a long time!

Owning a firearm is a moot point to defending your freedoms. Your freedoms have been taken away with pen strokes not gun shots.

Examples?

Election 2000, Bush didn't get the majority of votes in FL or the popular vote. He became President via the Supreme Court 9 people who were never elected chose your President for you.

The Patriot Act which helps fight "terrorism" limits people's rights more than ever.

So how do guns protect freedoms you no longer have? They're not going to take away your guns! They want you to keep them and indulge the illusion of a free society.

If you really cared about your freedoms and liberty so much you wouldn't be willing to sacrifice it for security.


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Rono]
    #1178932 - 12/30/02 07:02 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Election 2000, Bush didn't get the majority of votes in FL or the popular vote. He became President via the Supreme Court 9 people who were never elected chose your President for you.



You're smart enough to know better.

All the court did was enforce the rules that were in existance for years. They did not appoint anyone. Merely repeating that lie does not make it so.

I do agree the"Patriot Act" sucks.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Edited by luvdemshrooms (12/30/02 07:03 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 month, 14 days
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1178947 - 12/30/02 07:10 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Although we may have different opinions on that "election"...you can't deny that it was controversial.

The point of the gun issue remains the same...nobody is gaining or losing freedom because of guns...it's because of policies and pen strokes. What good is the ability to own a firearm, if they can throw you in jail at anytime for speaking out against the government?


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bowling for Columbine [Re: Rono]
    #1178995 - 12/30/02 07:33 AM (18 years, 9 months ago)

Yes it was controversial. However it was so because people tried to change the rules in the middle of the game merely because they weren't happy with the direction of the election.

All recounts after the fact (with the possible difference of one) upheld the Bush victory. Most interesting is the fact that the recount the Gore team specifically requested also showed Bush as the victor.

The ability to own a firearm becomes important when and if the government gets out of hand. Laugh if you will at that but I think if it came down to it, many Americans, including a lot of the armed forces would rise up and take action. I know I would. Now, while some of the recent laws passed should not have been, I believe the courts will overturn many provisions in them. And I don't believe the government will start carting people away willy-nilly. God help them if they do.

As for throwing people in jail for speaking, perhaps you weren't aware of this....

Clinton Rejects Freedom of Speech!

In the summer of 1996 Glenn and Patricia Mendoza attended A Taste of Chicago, in Chicago, Illinois. An event which President Clinton was also attending. Mrs. Mendoza allegedly yelled, "You suck! And those boys died." Referring to the earlier incident in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in which an explosion was set off, probably by a terrorist, killing 19 servicemen. Mrs. Mendoza believed Mr. Clinton was somehow at fault for the explosion, explaining her comments. Some feel that Bill Clinton caused or contributed to the cause of these murders, though I'm not sure how.

At any rate, 15 minutes after Clinton departed the event, Mrs. Mendoza was arrested for her comments. "You might need a lawyer!" her husband Glenn shouted, then found himself in cuffs as well.

Now, if you feel that perhaps Mrs. Mendoza shouldn't have used the term, "You suck!" then try this one on for size. In 1993, William Kelly of Chicago was arrested for shouting to Clinton asking where was the middle class tax cut. Such intolerable uses of FREE speech got these people thrown in jail! What happened to the laws? What happened to the First Amendment regarding FREE SPEECH!?

It seems to me that Mr. Clinton is selective on who he has arrested and who he doesn't because when an AIDS activist yelled about his not doing enough for the disease, Clinton defended the heckler citing his duty to listen to criticism. Hummm, that's a new one for you huh? Situations such as this tend to make me wonder what other categories Mr. Clinton is selective on.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Worthy of arrest?

I think not.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Bowling for Columbine
( 1 2 3 all )
RandalFlagg
3,397 49 09/09/04 09:20 PM
by Mushmonkey
* Gun violence in America, why?
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 4,275 49 08/26/03 12:45 AM
by Cornholio
* Perhaps Violence Is Called For? Deadly Disease Dickhead!
( 1 2 all )
SCleROTiUM_LICK 2,841 24 06/01/07 08:35 PM
by fireworks_god
* Bowling For Columbine - Lying with the help of the Media
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )
lysergic 10,041 211 09/16/03 11:01 AM
by Zildjian
* Do you view violence as an acceptable form of force to impose your will?
( 1 2 3 all )
RandalFlagg
3,681 58 08/12/05 07:42 PM
by LSDempire
* Heston's speech from Bowling for Columbine. Baby_Hitler 2,023 18 10/03/03 01:59 PM
by DoctorJ
* columbine ..bush HS??...
( 1 2 3 all )
Annapurna1
3,001 55 10/09/05 01:10 PM
by Annapurna1
* Bowling for Columbine
( 1 2 all )
FlusH 1,456 22 03/05/03 05:45 AM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
6,471 topic views. 2 members, 1 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.044 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 17 queries.