unconditional basic income

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Balsary posted 'this' in support of exactly one post.
Is he on record as giving blanket support to Phil as a poster?

Not even something I intimated. Just strikes me as comedic given his blanket disdain for myself and KTF for our debating styles while cheerleading for Philly.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
It's hard to take your snark seriously when you've already (through gritted teeth of course) complimented me. You know I'm not ignorant, so the cutting jape (bravo to anyone who can identify the source) doesn't do much for me.

You're the chap who loves scanning back through post histories of members. I suggest you give Phil's a looksie. It shan't take long to prove me (at this point, it's almost starting to annoy me) correct.

My credit to Phil above spoke to the content of his one post. I agree that Phil can be unnecessarily brash at times, but the post above ain't one of those times. I can give him credit where it's due and still find him offensive, the same as I do with you. That sir, is the definition of civility.

Btw, I never complimented your intelligence, I said you were honest and fair which I stand by. The irony of your ignorance post is just too much though. We are all ignorant in ways. To think that you somehow are above that speaks volumes about both your ego and your ignorance (which is where my problem has always been with you).

You remember that agree to disagree offer you made the other day? I think I'm going to have to take you up on it. It seems like the easy way out, but I don't think we're going to have a discussion that has any positive results at this time. I'm not interested in derailing yet another thread.
 
Last edited:

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,309
Media
0
Likes
2,102
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Not even something I intimated. Just strikes me as comedic given his blanket disdain for myself and KTF for our debating styles while cheerleading for Philly.
Well, you'd have a stronger case if the post he had chosen to support had demonstrated a bit more incivility.
You're reaching, Eric.
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Well, you'd have a stronger case if the post he had chosen to support had demonstrated a bit more incivility.
You're reaching, Eric.

I'd allow some room for concession, except that Balsary just basically called Tea Partiers insane.

Civility really does rule the roost round deez parts :confused:
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,309
Media
0
Likes
2,102
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I'd allow some room for concession, except that Balsary just basically called Tea Partiers insane.

But you're just changing the topic, Eric.
What he says about Tea Party members has nothing to do with the merits of what you said about him.
But, whatevuh ....
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
My credit to Phil above spoke to the content of his one post. I agree that Phil can be unnecessarily brash at times, but the post above ain't one of those times. I can give him credit where it's due and still find him offensive, the same as I do with you. That sir, is the definition of civility.

Btw, I never complimented your intelligence, I said you were honest and fair which I stand by. The irony of your ignorance post is just too much though. We are all ignorant in ways. To think that you somehow are above that speaks volumes about both your ego and your ignorance (which is where my problem has always been with you).

You remember that agree to disagree offer you made the other day? I think I'm going to have to take you up on it. It seems like the easy way out, but I don't think we're going to have a discussion that has any positive results at this time. I'm not interested in derailing yet another thread.

Lol, I love these wunderbar assumptions Bals. I say I want to remove the ignorance from a discussion, and all of a sudden that means I'm NEVER wrong about ANYTHING?!!?!

I have an extremely high sense of self, but even I wouldn't say that.

PS, the acronym for my name is literally EGO, so you're going to have to blame the parentals for that one. Too bad they didn't go with Cleetus, my Dad's first choice :cool:
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
I'd allow some room for concession, except that Balsary just basically called Tea Partiers insane.

Civility really does rule the roost round deez parts :confused:

You mean here where I specifically said I wouldn't call them insane?

I'd have a hard time believing a couple of these, but who knows. I don't know if insane is the right word, but they definitely seem to reject reality. My father recently said to me he'd bet a million dollars that Obama wasn't born in the US. I didn't even know what to say to that.
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You're making me rethink that honesty compliment.

Think away. Deliberate away. Insult away should you see fit. You see, my friend (general term, don't be offended. I don't really mean it), this would be how an adult would manage someone's snark and/or insults. I'm not going to run away and tattle to the almighty mods. You're clearly ok with the sorts of actions you claim to abhor. Why not revel in them?

Fwiw, rejecting reality is roughly the exact same thing as insane. So, in refusing to sling mud with a rather ambiguous, wishy washy post, you still did. Bravo sir! I think you might qualify for a spot on the Sunday news shows.
 
Last edited:

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,678
Media
0
Likes
2,812
Points
333
Location
Greece
Dear Drifty,


It may surprise you, as it did me, that our Labour Party (way more socialist than your Democrats) abolished our flat tax system that our Conservatives (way more socialist than your Republicans) had always supported.

Personally, I would have a flat tax system in the UK of up to £20,000 ($32,000).

Do you know how big an industry Taxation is? It is a bit mad isn't it and counter intuitive, but that is the system that leads to theories such as Underguy's. Economies get so big that you can forget the underlying principles and believe that they exist without any relationship to realities. If we all agree that bananas are worth $10,000 an ounce then so be it. Who are we to argue?
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,309
Media
0
Likes
2,102
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Fwiw, rejecting reality is roughly the exact same thing as insane. So, in refusing to sling mud with a rather ambiguous, wishy washy post, you still did. Bravo sir! I think you might qualify for a spot on the Sunday news shows.
This is just silly.
If someone has used a particular word to describe something and I reply, "I don't know if XXX is the right word," that would be an unemphatic but very clear rejection of whatever term was in question. That's just how that idiom works.
That post was not particularly wishy washy. There was only one meaning for any reader not savaged by a disingenuous eye.

Now, Balsary did say that the Tea Party peeps reject reality. You equate this to an implication of insanity.
Hardly. It may be true that a mark of psychosis is an inability to perceive reality correctly, but Balsary is talking about a rejection of very particular realities, not reality in general. He's not saying that Ted Cruz hears voices at 3 a.m. in the morning. He's not saying that Sarah Palin thinks Todd is the antichrist.

There's quite a wide degree of agreement on this planet that the Tea Party is living in the unrecapturable past -- and in that sense, they're rejecting reality. As you know, even many eminent Republicans hold that view.
That's doesn't mean anyone's saying they're candidates for the wacko ward.
 
Last edited:

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
What do you mean why should it change? You're proposing a new system and have yet to identify where these funds will come from. You are supporting a system of change as evident by this proposal going up for a national vote, so don't ask me why should it change, that makes zero sense.

I'm reading the rest of your responses and I'm feeling the same puzzled reaction to each reply. My initial question was simply to understand where the funding would come from to give away free money and you've yet to answer other than more taxes from a system that is reducing its work force. Obviously, I'm not satisfied with that response so no reason to go into a tit for tat discussion on why giving away free money incentivizes people not to work.
Why should the way i finance a system change, just cause i change the way of spending?

Currently, many people get supported by unemployent payments, you dont have to pay for a kindergarten and if you start an education, the goverment pays you as well... And there are many many other payments and services. A lot of these would be no longer required, these money could be used for the basic income.

Currently do we tax labour higher then interests. Why? You have to do nothing for an income out of interests, something in total different to income out of labour - make it at least equal. It would increase the tax income.


Even if you argue, that the unemploymency would go up. It doesnt mean that the tax income would go down.
Currently do get only 50% of all income out of labour get taxed - so, even if EVERYONE who earns too less to pay taxes would quit their jobs, the tax income out of labour wouldnt change. But i doubt that so many people would quit their jobs and that would mean, the tax income would increase, cause in the new system every income gets taxed. No matter how small...


So, again: why should their be a problem to finance it?
 
Last edited:

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE START NAME CALLING AND THROW SHIT ON EACH OTHER , JUST CAUSE SOMEONE COMPARED TWO POSTS?????

If this is the standard of discussion, does anyone wonder that the senat acts like a kindergarten, as well?


:redface:
 

KTF40

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
1,877
Media
3
Likes
60
Points
133
Location
DC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So, again: why should their be a problem to finance it?
Because you're proposing a system that gives away free money to every single citizen and you have yet to identify where this free money comes from. Not to mention the fact that this system would only have a negative impact upon the number of people within a tax base as it provides an incentive to be unemploymed.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Because you're proposing a system that gives away free money to every single citizen and you have yet to identify where this free money comes from. Not to mention the fact that this system would only have a negative impact upon the number of people within a tax base as it provides an incentive to be unemploymed.
Again
You can increase taxation and a huge part is financed by the safed money out of then excess and no more needed services...

Also does only an unemploymency higher then 50% will influence the tax income negative. - and YOU still couldnt offer an arguement why so many people should become lazy AND ARE NO MORE WILLING TO SEARCH FOR A TASK
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,309
Media
0
Likes
2,102
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE START NAME CALLING AND THROW SHIT ON EACH OTHER , JUST CAUSE SOMEONE COMPARED TWO POSTS?????

If this is the standard of discussion, does anyone wonder that the senat acts like a kindergarten, as well?

:redface:
Do you mean the House of Representatives, Perados?
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
Think away. Deliberate away. Insult away should you see fit. You see, my friend (general term, don't be offended. I don't really mean it), this would be how an adult would manage someone's snark and/or insults. I'm not going to run away and tattle to the almighty mods. You're clearly ok with the sorts of actions you claim to abhor. Why not revel in them?

Fwiw, rejecting reality is roughly the exact same thing as insane. So, in refusing to sling mud with a rather ambiguous, wishy washy post, you still did. Bravo sir! I think you might qualify for a spot on the Sunday news shows.

Roughly the exact same thing, how can it be roughly the exact same thing? You're trying real hard pick a fight here Eric. If I've bruised that enormous ego of yours I apologize. Perhaps you should start LESG and get some support for that. You get to decide all the rules, so insults can be mandatory. It will be roughly the exact same as this site.