1% now, then raise to 5%, then to 10%(...) and more tax is every single time awful.
A nation has to have taxes in order to fund things like roads. Even police stations and fire departments are funded by taxes. Where do you propose that the money should come from for those things, if not from taxes?
Less and simple taxes and police, law and law enforcement should be very local.
Less and simple taxes and police, law and law enforcement should be very local.
But, according to your argument, if there are taxes, even very small ones, they will get bigger as time passes. And this, according to you, leads to socialism. Even the monarchy that you want for your country would need taxes to support the Royal family and your Empire. And this, by your logic, would also lead to socialism.
Less and simple taxes and police, law and law enforcement should be very local.
But, according to your argument, if there are taxes, even very small ones, they will get bigger as time passes. And this, according to you, leads to socialism. Even the monarchy that you want for your country would need taxes to support the Royal family and your Empire. And this, by your logic, would also lead to socialism.
Nope. An socialist like Bernie will gradually increase taxes.
Even if everything, including police is private, you will have some arrangement with taxes... Income Tax on USA was supposed to be temporary, now is permanent. Tax income is a aberration. You need to work against your will to pay the government what your acquired. It just should't exist. Estonia has taxes, but they are simple and straightforward.
No matter if you disagree with them ideologically, I can assure you that Biden is showing a seriousness about the job by hiring Klain that has been entirely absent for the last four years. They are going to govern the country as professionals, and treat the gravity of the situation with the respect and attention it deserves. And maybe I'm just getting older. But even that is enough for me at this point.
The idea that monarchy is desirable but that socialist-based autocracy is unacceptable makes no sense to me. It's worth noting that North Korea -- now run by the grandson of the original leader -- is functionally no different than a monarchy.
Nope. An socialist like Bernie will gradually increase taxes.
Except that he's not a socialist, he's a Democrat. And Democrats have never raised taxes up to the level that it would turn USA into a socialist country. They always have a limit, and nothing indicates that they are willing to cross that limit.
And that was my point: calling everyone a "socialist" doesn't help the conversation. It would be the same if I said that everyone who disagrees with me is a monarchist. But you will find a lot of people that disagree with me and are not monarchists.
By the way, just out of curiosity, why do you even want a monarchy, aside from your family's history? Why do you think that a monarchy would be better than capitalism or socialism?
The idea that monarchy is desirable but that socialist-based autocracy is unacceptable makes no sense to me. It's worth noting that North Korea -- now run by the grandson of the original leader -- is functionally no different than a monarchy.
Monarchy rise to power due a natural order process. A socialist autocracy rise to power defying the natural order. One understand that people are different and the other wanna equality above everything which can only exist under total tyranny.
You can't compare Liechtenstein with North Korea or Cuba for eg.
Or compare the prosperous Empire of Brazil with the republic of Brazil, literally the most violent country in the world. Is a semi socialist, not complete socialist but is a example. While Cuba regime takes over 90% of what Cubans makes on the exterior, Brazilian royal family did everything that they could to end slavery. Threatened to revoke the nobility title of everyone who refused to free their slaves and did everything that they could to make slavery illegal. It lead to a coup which established a failed republic. British royal family also did everything that they could to end slavery. The British owned territories on Americas(north and south) ended slavery first, they patrolled the oceans to prevent further slave trade and also payed a huge price to end slavery.
You can't compare this guys with North Korea or USSR which sends your entire family to concentration camps aka slavery for the crimes of a single family member. And when I mean crime, i mean trying to escape this hell on earth.
TL;DR one is enslaving people. Other is freeing enslaved people.
IDK why people tend to vote for socialism, but to "move" to capitalism. A lot of Venezuelas hate colonialism but prefer to live in French Guiana than on Venezuela.
By the way, just out of curiosity, why do you even want a monarchy, aside from your family's history? Why do you think that a monarchy would be better than capitalism or socialism?
Because WAS better. Much more stable, peaceful and prosperous.
Ok, but why do you think that Brazil would be better today if it had a monarchy? Slavery doesn't exist anymore in Brazil, so in what way would a monarchy be better than the capitalist democracy that you have right now?
Ok, but why do you think that Brazil would be better today if it had a monarchy? Slavery doesn't exist anymore in Brazil, so in what way would a monarchy be better than the capitalist democracy that you have right now?
Slavery doesn't exist cuz the imperial family ended it and suffered a coup.
Well, it's been a long time, let's see what's going on in the Politics thr-
(leaves)
What is the problem? Teen pregnancy in "favelas" is a HUGE problem. People who can't feed themselves with 5+ children not knowing who is the father, getting pregnant on "baile funks", children being raised with no proper education, nutrition and medicine, that tragedy needs to stop.
It is unsustainable and I don't wanna millions starving to death. We are not a rich country that can maintain most of the population on welfare.
Sadly, it's quite a widespread opinion among the right in Latin American countries. This isn't the first time I've debated someone who advocates forced sterilization, believe it or not. I hear this type of stuff on a regular basis.
EDIT : Just like paying for sex is not rape, paying for someone to be sterilization is not forced sterilization.
Yes because being POOR is genetic. Nevermind that we've already seen the evils that eugenics has historically led to. Like say, the genocide of the Native Americans or, say, the horrors of Nazism...
Sadly, it's quite a widespread opinion among the right in Latin American countries. This isn't the first time I've debated someone who advocates forced sterilization, believe it or not. I hear this type of stuff on a regular basis.
As i've said, it is NOT FORCED. It is encouraged via money. Just like paying for sex is not rape.
Alberto Fujimori is the unique guy who implemented forced sterilization in the continent. And he was a criminal who fled to Japan to escape punishment(if is not obvious by his surname, he has Japanese ancestry)
As i've said, it is NOT FORCED. It is encouraged via money.
And where is that money going to come from? Taxes? But you said you didn't want a lot of taxes...
It will reduce the government spending on the long run which will reduce taxes on the long run. But it will never happens due Catholicism...
Poor people tends to vote more on the left. If only my City voted, Bolsonaro would won with about 77% of votes on my city. On the poorest state, would lose miserably if was 20 years ago, before mass migrations of people from poorer states, I an pretty sure that Bolsonaro would have 95% of votes.
Welcome, folks, to the typical political discussions among Latin Americans. I'll be your tour guide to these lands where discussing politics is beyond hardcore. If you look around, you will see that we are discussing if mass sterilization of the poor is or is not forced if money is given to them, and we are also discussing if monarchies are better than capitalism and socialism. Just another day in Latin American politics.
So... is democracy the problem or is it Catholicism?
My guess is he is saying that government spending is high because Catholics have alot of kids because the more dogmatic frown upon birth control. I have no idea how widespread this view is in Latin America. It's basically ignored by every Catholic in the US. I don't really want to be in this discussion......
So... is democracy the problem or is it Catholicism?
Apparently both, since the solution seems to be, presumably, an evangelist or protestant monarchy. A solution which I highly doubt would solve anything. I don't like capitalism at all, but if I have to choose between capitalism and monarchies, I choose capitalism. There's a good reason why we're no longer in the Middle Ages, despite the fact that we like to play video games inspired by those times.
Welcome, folks, to the typical political discussions among Latin Americans. I'll be your tour guide to these lands where discussing politics is beyond hardcore. If you look around, you will see that we are discussing if mass sterilization of the poor is or is not forced if money is given to them, and we are also discussing if monarchies are better than capitalism and socialism. Just another day in Latin American politics.
Wrong. Every latin american country is extreme left leaning. Even Chile is becoming more and more lefitist.
Argentina was Richer than most Europe before Peron. Now is a semi socialist hellhole.
And an monarchy can be capitalist which is the ideal. Was during the monarchy that Brazil had more propriety rights, stable currency, etc. A lot of guys on Europe also advocate for monarchies. And anyone here believes that Stalin was better than Romanov family? That the second Reich was worse than the Third?
@SorcererV1ct0r "As i've said, it is NOT FORCED. It is encouraged via money. Just like paying for sex is not rape."
Dude, "accept sterilization or die" is not a choice. That is 100% forced.
Nope. Accept or not receive money. Or working is slavery too?
Which is a death sentence to, say, the disabled.
An woman who get pregnant 6 times in 6 years on "baile funks" without knowing any father and expect the government to pay for everything is the problem. A disabled guy needs help.
But even lowering the ultra high requirements to vasectomy is most likely to never happens. Sadly more and more regions will become like a "favela"
So... is democracy the problem or is it Catholicism?
Apparently both, since the solution seems to be, presumably, an evangelist or protestant monarchy. A solution which I highly doubt would solve anything. I don't like capitalism at all, but if I have to choose between capitalism and monarchies, I choose capitalism. There's a good reason why we're no longer in the Middle Ages, despite the fact that we like to play video games inspired by those times.
Wrong. The most capitalist countries in today world are monarchies. Like Liechtenstein for eg.
You can't compare this guys with North Korea or USSR which sends your entire family to concentration camps aka slavery for the crimes of a single family member. And when I mean crime, i mean trying to escape this hell on earth.
lol yes I can. Because monarchies regularly punished whole families for the crime of a single family member and had widespread slavery and had effectively similar things to concentration camps.
Just admit it, you want your side to be in charge no matter what. It's clearly the first principle you're operating from.
This argument about welfare mothers is pretty prevelant on the American right as well, but the conversation typically stops at letting them rot in poverty, not eugenics. And I fail to see how providing funds at barely a sustenance level is going to be any more expensive than these mass payouts for sterilization. Is there a sub-set of the Brazilian right that is secular?? Because the Catholic Church would view this plan as nothing less than anathema. Then again, so would much of the civilized world.
Comments
Less and simple taxes and police, law and law enforcement should be very local.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/11/investing/pfizer-ceo-albert-bourla-stock-sale-vaccine/index.html
But, according to your argument, if there are taxes, even very small ones, they will get bigger as time passes. And this, according to you, leads to socialism. Even the monarchy that you want for your country would need taxes to support the Royal family and your Empire. And this, by your logic, would also lead to socialism.
Nope. An socialist like Bernie will gradually increase taxes.
Even if everything, including police is private, you will have some arrangement with taxes... Income Tax on USA was supposed to be temporary, now is permanent. Tax income is a aberration. You need to work against your will to pay the government what your acquired. It just should't exist. Estonia has taxes, but they are simple and straightforward.
No matter if you disagree with them ideologically, I can assure you that Biden is showing a seriousness about the job by hiring Klain that has been entirely absent for the last four years. They are going to govern the country as professionals, and treat the gravity of the situation with the respect and attention it deserves. And maybe I'm just getting older. But even that is enough for me at this point.
Except that he's not a socialist, he's a Democrat. And Democrats have never raised taxes up to the level that it would turn USA into a socialist country. They always have a limit, and nothing indicates that they are willing to cross that limit.
And that was my point: calling everyone a "socialist" doesn't help the conversation. It would be the same if I said that everyone who disagrees with me is a monarchist. But you will find a lot of people that disagree with me and are not monarchists.
Monarchy rise to power due a natural order process. A socialist autocracy rise to power defying the natural order. One understand that people are different and the other wanna equality above everything which can only exist under total tyranny.
You can't compare Liechtenstein with North Korea or Cuba for eg.
Or compare the prosperous Empire of Brazil with the republic of Brazil, literally the most violent country in the world. Is a semi socialist, not complete socialist but is a example. While Cuba regime takes over 90% of what Cubans makes on the exterior, Brazilian royal family did everything that they could to end slavery. Threatened to revoke the nobility title of everyone who refused to free their slaves and did everything that they could to make slavery illegal. It lead to a coup which established a failed republic. British royal family also did everything that they could to end slavery. The British owned territories on Americas(north and south) ended slavery first, they patrolled the oceans to prevent further slave trade and also payed a huge price to end slavery.
You can't compare this guys with North Korea or USSR which sends your entire family to concentration camps aka slavery for the crimes of a single family member. And when I mean crime, i mean trying to escape this hell on earth.
TL;DR one is enslaving people. Other is freeing enslaved people.
IDK why people tend to vote for socialism, but to "move" to capitalism. A lot of Venezuelas hate colonialism but prefer to live in French Guiana than on Venezuela.
Because WAS better. Much more stable, peaceful and prosperous.
...
...
(opens mouth, raises finger)
...
...
(leaves, like I should have)
Slavery doesn't exist cuz the imperial family ended it and suffered a coup.
What is the problem? Teen pregnancy in "favelas" is a HUGE problem. People who can't feed themselves with 5+ children not knowing who is the father, getting pregnant on "baile funks", children being raised with no proper education, nutrition and medicine, that tragedy needs to stop.
It is unsustainable and I don't wanna millions starving to death. We are not a rich country that can maintain most of the population on welfare.
Thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou
Forced sterilization? Openly advocated forced sterilization?
What the actual fuck?
Nope. Voluntary. And temporary.
And what is the alternative? Millions starving death?
Is one of proposals of Bolsonaro which he has zero chance of implementing. Tranlsate to english on browser. The source is in Portuguese and IDK any English news about the topic https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2018/06/bolsonaro-defendeu-esterilizacao-de-pobres-para-combater-miseria-e-crime.shtml
EDIT : Just like paying for sex is not rape, paying for someone to be sterilization is not forced sterilization.
Sadly, it's quite a widespread opinion among the right in Latin American countries. This isn't the first time I've debated someone who advocates forced sterilization, believe it or not. I hear this type of stuff on a regular basis.
Yes because being POOR is genetic. Nevermind that we've already seen the evils that eugenics has historically led to. Like say, the genocide of the Native Americans or, say, the horrors of Nazism...
As i've said, it is NOT FORCED. It is encouraged via money. Just like paying for sex is not rape.
Alberto Fujimori is the unique guy who implemented forced sterilization in the continent. And he was a criminal who fled to Japan to escape punishment(if is not obvious by his surname, he has Japanese ancestry)
Dude, "accept sterilization or die" is not a choice. That is 100% forced.
Nope. Accept or not receive money. Or working is slavery too?
And where is that money going to come from? Taxes? But you said you didn't want a lot of taxes...
It will reduce the government spending on the long run which will reduce taxes on the long run. But it will never happens due Catholicism...
Poor people tends to vote more on the left. If only my City voted, Bolsonaro would won with about 77% of votes on my city. On the poorest state, would lose miserably if was 20 years ago, before mass migrations of people from poorer states, I an pretty sure that Bolsonaro would have 95% of votes.
Which is a death sentence to, say, the disabled.
My guess is he is saying that government spending is high because Catholics have alot of kids because the more dogmatic frown upon birth control. I have no idea how widespread this view is in Latin America. It's basically ignored by every Catholic in the US. I don't really want to be in this discussion......
Apparently both, since the solution seems to be, presumably, an evangelist or protestant monarchy. A solution which I highly doubt would solve anything. I don't like capitalism at all, but if I have to choose between capitalism and monarchies, I choose capitalism. There's a good reason why we're no longer in the Middle Ages, despite the fact that we like to play video games inspired by those times.
Wrong. Every latin american country is extreme left leaning. Even Chile is becoming more and more lefitist.
Argentina was Richer than most Europe before Peron. Now is a semi socialist hellhole.
And an monarchy can be capitalist which is the ideal. Was during the monarchy that Brazil had more propriety rights, stable currency, etc. A lot of guys on Europe also advocate for monarchies. And anyone here believes that Stalin was better than Romanov family? That the second Reich was worse than the Third?
An woman who get pregnant 6 times in 6 years on "baile funks" without knowing any father and expect the government to pay for everything is the problem. A disabled guy needs help.
But even lowering the ultra high requirements to vasectomy is most likely to never happens. Sadly more and more regions will become like a "favela"
Wrong. The most capitalist countries in today world are monarchies. Like Liechtenstein for eg.
lol yes I can. Because monarchies regularly punished whole families for the crime of a single family member and had widespread slavery and had effectively similar things to concentration camps.
Just admit it, you want your side to be in charge no matter what. It's clearly the first principle you're operating from.