Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Lord Blackadder, Oct 23, 2009.
Dang Socialist Fascist Communist Nazis.
"The group held a demonstration in Berlin on Wednesday to draw attention to their plans, throwing fake banknotes into the air.
Mr Vollmer said it was "really strange that so few people came".
I wonder why. I do have to give them credit for wanting to do this. It's very unusual for the wealthy to ask to be taxed more.
How refreshing to see turkeys voting for Christmas. Doesn't happen often.
It's definitely not something you'll ever hear in America.
But it makes sense to me.
Sounds like a case of "I'm cold, so you should go put on a sweater."
If they feel so strongly, why not decide how much in extra taxes they feel they should pay and donate to the government, build a school, start a new charity, throw it from the rooftops, or whatever?
Nah, sounds like they realize that the massive wealth redistribution from the poor to the rich simply isn't sustainable or smart.
Don't forget this is Germany, so the most efficient use of their money would be to give it to the government!
Your tired hyperbole aside, is this a rampant problem in Germany? Are there people dying in the streets so some German robber baron can have his schloss?
Ein, zwei, ein, zwie, build that empire...
...fair point, but as an American I'm accustomed to inefficient government.
Then celebrate with a world war?
What percentage of taxation do you think the US government wastes?
And you have the gall to talk of "tired hyperbole"?
Depends on who you ask and their definition of waste.
Personally I believe it's anything that can't be paid for by the current tax revenues, which this year accounts for quite a lot of stuff.
We're obviously having too much Octoberfest.
Fair question, but how are you defining waste?
The clue shop is located on Satire Street. You missed the turn.
Idiots. Donate to a charity if you feel that strongly about it.
Money the government spends on something that they don't need to. For example if you're building a metro line that should cost $800 million and you spend $1 billion on it then you're wasting 20% of your money. Or if you subsidise rich farmers, like CAP in Europe which in the UK gives the most money to the Duke of Westminster.
What if that extra $200b gets you a better metro system? I think forcing governments to go with the lowest bidder is stupid.
No. See- in some countries they actually think to act before something becomes a crisis. In some countries, people actually give a s*** about each other.
To take this metro example there are things you can generally agree a good metro system needs: safe, reliable, fairly quiet, comfortable, frequent (say every 2 minutes) not too crowded and climate controlled trains with automatic stop announcements (in English as well as any local languages, especially if they use a non-Roman alphabet) and stations with reasonable positioning, good interchanges, lack of queuing, information about upcoming services, a good map, disabled access and a smartcard payment system. The other thing you want is lots of lines but that's just expensive.
Most modern metro systems (such as Beijing, Santiago, Montreal, Delhi and Singapore) and even some older systems (such as London) meet most of those criteria.
Most of the difficult stuff in construction is the boring stuff that has to happen behind the scenes so all that stuff actually happens on time and on budget. And if you want to know how much all that should cost look at Delhi and Singapore for example as they seem to have particularly efficient companies building theirs.
Somebody should ask why is there so much money sitting in banks in Andorra, Liechtenstein, and Monaco. I'll almost bet much of it is from German citizens putting their liquid assets in these "offshore financial centers" to keep their assets out of the hands of German tax authorities.
Here in the USA, we have a SERIOUS problem with these "offshore financial centers," with something like US$13 TRILLION in American-owned liquid assets sitting in OFCs to keep them out of the hands of the Internal Revenue Service. Small wonder why the US economy goes into the tank every 20 years or so, and changing out tax laws to encourage personal savings and capital investment staying in the USA would enormously help for a real economic revival in the USA.
How it should read
bunch of selfish rich Germans want OTHER RICH PEOPLE to pay more money.
whats to stop them from just donating the money themselves, because they are so arrogant as to think that others don't pay and they feel extra special by sacrificing other people's money while claiming they want to do it to themselves.
In other words, I laugh at these types of people, who cannot do it themselves without obligating others
Right. You don't have a clue as to what these people are already doing with their money.
Whatever they are doing with their money, they claim that they still have overage that they would like the government to tax from them.
While I have no specific experience, I suspect that overpaying one's taxes and refusing to collect any refund due would result in the gains remaining in the Treasury's coffers. I applaud people that donate as they see fit to non-profits that they see as deserving. The government is just another one of those. To send special accolades to individuals who would push to make their non-profit of choice receive additional compulsory donations from their colleagues, is strange.
I understand that the government provides many particular benefits that other non-profits cannot provide, but perhaps it would speak more towards their argument if these folks were to make a public show of their additional contributions and use public opinion to sway others in their cohort to do the same. Public pressure and sympathy yields less resistance than government mandate.
It's called living in a society. Reciprocity.
Or to sum it up, theres a set of criteria about what makes it good which pretty much everyone follows, there's not really a great deal of point in trying to slim back as you aren't going to save much money (as the expensive thing is building the tunnels and stations in the first place*), so the chances are if it costs a lot for not very much then money is probably being wasted (unless the rock is particularly difficult to tunnel.).
You can make the same argument about schools, the biggest cost there is employing the teachers and you can't really do without them.
Now maybe that doesn't apply to everything but it does apply here.
* and we know this as noone has tried to slim back