He's fucked the English portion of the test. He still fails to grasp there's a an English word for: per 100, per 1,000 and per 10,000. But anything else is the same as per 100. If you can't label your work, it doesn't matter how well you can cipher.
You didn't label your work. Seriously. I don't think Buck understands labels. That's why he keeps posting shitty graphs with no labels. As long as he can cipher it, then it's good to go. Ciphering is only half the battle.
All I did was ask questions. If that makes me a liberal than so be it. I am hoping to see things from another perspective and actually pursuing out of the box thought. I do not understand why hostility becomes necessary every time? You shouldn't take offense to me nor assume that I disagree with everything you say. Time and time again you water down your point by getting defensive and rude almost as if it is beyond your control. Privatization is the solution? and volunteerism is to replace social welfare? I am not so sure that people like you would volunteer to help those who need it, no offense, but humanitarian issues don't seem high on your list. A society ruled by unregulated capitalism is certainly tricky to see functioning as smoothly as you do. Taxes nor government are liberal inventions. The fact is that no matter how the facts spell out our best interests and the current reality you will be unable to process them with objectivity. You are in the box.
You are completely misinterpreting central leadership. A representative democracy is central leadership. A lawmaking body, an executive or executive body, a system of government, dictatorship, basically anything except lawlessness. The solution to the rich differs from that of the poor. I don't know what it is, I never claimed to. A utopian society is not a lot of things......I would start by looking at those.
It gets really depressing there's only two people who really understand political theory on a politics forum, Rob Roy and Dr. Kynes. There's a few others who are intelligent, who know who they are, but aren't uber political geeks. Then there's those like Buck who are a real downer to your high and make you hostile.
Such an incredibly stupid Idea on so many levels it is beyond words.
What road has the government ever paid for? Do you mean taxpayers? The government doesn't create wealth, so how can it pay for something without confiscating from others? At least give credit where credit is due...
It does not take an expert political savvy to interpret some of the very basic behavior going down here and likewise I get depressed. Politics is a manifestation of ones values and is important to understand others perceptions. I live my politics every day and take it seriously when you call me a freeloader. I do have a fairly unique set of needs that the government has filled and I see the importance of that. I see a lot of simplistic and dismissive rhetoric to any view outside your own. I don't aim to win a battle here, I just want to grasp what the process of those who I cannot relate. I don't see a lot of others with that agenda so I fill a role in that sense. This is a debate and not many respect that.
A majority elects a representative government who makes laws on their behalf. Taxes go to many things and are decided by a democratic process albeit not a direct one. This is not forced....it is the result of a democratic process.
Its a lot easier to call somebody a racist if they don't volunteer for "humanitarian efforts." Democrats have been changing the words around for years now to try and conceal their evil as good intentions. Obama's latest full blown political correctness assault came last week when he released his obamacare pamphlet regarding the individual mandate. It is not called a tax at the end of the year for people who don't buy health insurance. taxes, fees, and fines are now called "shared responsibility payments."
Confiscating and taxation are not the same concept...
Thats where you're wrong. A tax implies that voters decided it was best for their communities. Confiscation is what we see today when powerful union bosses get together with their lobbyists and back pocket politicians to impose their will in a post constitutional republic.
Nonetheless they are not the same concept. In most arguments I am seeing taxation as the forced element. Voters decided which corrupt politician to represent them. The rest is bullshit but hasn't changed much at the core in my perception.
Are you sure that a majority actually elects "representatives" ? What about the alleged minority that doesn't want to participate and simply wants to be left alone to pursue peaceful interests? Are they bound to uphold the "laws" that others have imposed on them, even when those same laws involve killing people that haven't harmed them?
That is a good question. The majority rules paradigm is what defines right and wrong in that sense to the masses. It seems like not much would get done otherwise if forced was out of the equation. I personally don't trust the majority and that makes this system difficult but there is a functional aspect to it.