Utopia Talk / Politics / What went wrong?

Cloud Strife Member	Tue Mar 16 13:39:46 Why is there this cultural rift of basic understanding between European and American cultures these days? Europeans completely miss out on the basic incentive based culture of America, and Americans either scoff at or envy the social safety net and consequentially strong government oversight of Europe. There are so many bigger fish to fry... Why do we have to keep trying to prove our respective ways better?
The Children Member	Tue Mar 16 13:47:28 "what went wrong" is about the dumbest thing you have said. It never went wrong. Europe and USA always had a different culture. And always will. So to sum it all up. Nothing went wrong.
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 13:50:09 Core values are diverging more and more between the developed world and the right half of USA. Europe gets on fine with the other hslf of the USA. Also, its BS that its just Europe. Pretty much the entire developed world is sick and tired of the right half of the USA, as is the entire 2nd and 3rd world.
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 16 13:51:05 Europe kind of went completely crazy after WWI and now they're a bunch of pacifistic naive little pleasure-seeking nonentities.
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 13:52:17 The right hslf of Israel and the right half of the USA are pretty much the only ones who like each other. They should make their own religious country somewhere.
Nekran Member	Tue Mar 16 13:52:54 There's a big difference between the petty differences that the populations of the US and the EU have and the relationship the leaders have. When we're honest, we know we're by extremely far eachother's most important allies and that won't be changing in a hurry.
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 13:55:12 But mainly, Bush happened. And that lesson isn't forgotten yet.
habebe Member	Tue Mar 16 13:59:59 I have no problems with Euro's on the whole, every group has a few assholes . Growing up my dad had many Saudi friends, and out of the 10-12 saudis he knew only one was really an ass. The problems generally come from people who like to start trouble because they think they can do no wrong, are in no way greedy, and some sort of gift to the world. Even most Chinese are not like TC.Most Euro's are not like Charper. As Nekran said, in the end we are eachothers best allies.
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 14:03:37 I can do plenty of wrong, plenty - Im just not greedy...I care little for material possessions, an unfathomable concept to this stupid fucking troll lol
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 14:05:03 The US righties certainly aren't our best allies at all. We saw that plenty good during Bush.
charper Member	Tue Mar 16 14:06:38 Anyone got those polls for where the USA was voted greatest threat to world peace during Bush?
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 16 14:07:03 To be fair...we didn't really abandon our allies when they needed us. Granted, we changed the name of french fries when France refused to follow us into Iraq, but if you guys got attacked while Bush was in office we'd likely still have helped you.
dfdffsad4fd New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:08:35 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:08:51 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds1 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:08:54 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds12 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:08:56 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds124 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:08:59 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds1246 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:01 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds12467 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:04 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dfdffsad4fds124671 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:06 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf31 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:09 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf312 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:31 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:36 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf31223 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:38 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf312234 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:42 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122345 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:45 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122345a New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:47 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122345ac New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:50 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122345acd New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:52 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3122345acdrhe New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:54 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3435 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:57 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:09:59 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433n New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:10:02 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433nd New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:10:04 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433ndng New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:10:07 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433ndnge New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:10:09 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
asf3433ndnged New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:10:35 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dgaddf New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:11:15 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dgaddf3 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:11:33 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dgaddf31 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:11:36 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
habebe Member	Tue Mar 16 14:11:37 " if you guys got attacked while Bush was in office we'd likely still have helped you." No question. We may argue over issues like global warming and such, but I'm very confident that if in case of a war on home soil either side (EU/US) would aid the other as much as they could.
dgaddf3156 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:11:40 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf32143 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:09 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf321431 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:12 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf3214312 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:15 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf3214312213 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:20 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf321431221333 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:23 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
dsf32143122133312321 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:37 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
sdf32321 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:44 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
sdf323212 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:47 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
sdf32321232 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:17:50 21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
Rugian Member	Tue Mar 16 14:18:29 Can't we IP ban this spammer?
sdf323212323234 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:21:21 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
sdf3232123232342 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:21:29 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
sdf32321232323425 New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:21:33 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
habebe Member	Tue Mar 16 14:23:02 http://www...e-america-it-wants-989653.html From a US perspective though, it does seem IMO that some of Europe is much more involved in wanting the US to to be more like them in general politics, which is looked at with a bit of skeptisism here. The US seems much more concerned about ME/Chinese politics than EU politics. However from the Euro's I've met personally (mostly exchange students) they seemed glad that we are how we are, and vica versa, I'd love to see Europe, and part of that is because they are different.
2321351fdsf New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:23:44 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
2321351fdsfvsdag New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:23:50 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
2321351fdsfvsdagjyjt New Member	Tue Mar 16 14:23:55 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
2321351fdsfvsdagjyjt Member	Tue Mar 16 14:24:02 Welcome to the Utopia Forums! The current time is Tue Mar 16 13:48:16 2010 Utopia Talk / Politics / Is the US greedier than Europe? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 15:56:15 The old thread is at like 96, and by the time I reply it will probably reach 100, so just getting it ready. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:00:32 Just to state my stance. I do not beleive that the US is greedier or less greedy than Europe, but that we donate in different ways. Oprah has claimed the US to be "the most generous nation on earth" but she does not factor in that in the US private donations are more poppular than in Europe mainly because they donate through government institutions mostly. So she is misleading, but as are Euro's who claim the US is just a bunch of greedy narcissists. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:05:28 I think that Americans are perceived as greedier because of their way of life, which to be quite honest is unsustainable. On average Americans consume practically everything at a much greater rate than their European counterparts, everything from water to medicine. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:11:44 mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:09:02 Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? Freshwater shortages are that ugly little thing that no on talks about, even though it is almost certainly likely to happen in our lifetimes. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:06 "Americans consume water at an unsustainable rate? " See: Las Vegas, Atlanta, pretty much all of Florida as well. xyz1 Member Mon Mar 15 16:15:47 It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:53 xyz, Well, actually I'd bet most of it is for farming, Agriculture is the number one export (I think) from California. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:22:54 Nimatzo, Well, that seems fair, we do consume a shit load, but much of that consumption is because we produce a shit load as well. That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy, for one thing we have a huge country (land mass) with large population clusters all over the place, where Europe is much more compact which at least for oil use plays a very big role. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:26:52 >>mexicantornado Member Mon Mar 15 16:18:04 Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water.<< Yes lets keep fucking everything up and assume that someone will eventually come up with a way to fix it before it all goes to hell. What an insightful and brilliant plan! Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:27:02 "Long before humanity has clean water shortages someone will invent a method to cheaply and quickly clean water. " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. "It wouldn't be so bad if you morons on the West Coast didn't waste so much water keeping your crappy lawns in the middle of the desert green. " Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:32 >>That said we do over consume in daily lives as well, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily greedy<< Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else, but my explanation was to explain why they might be perceived as such. I think people look at the rate that Americans consume and realize that resources are not infinite and for a lack of a better word they label Americans as greedy. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:29:56 " Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. " No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:30:57 One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:45:04 "No, I think the problem with that is that it is expensive. " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:16 Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:46:17 "One of the most terrible things ever invented are these fucking crop circles in the middle of the desert. You have seen these round and green abominations on Google Earth" True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. Milton Bradley Member Mon Mar 15 16:49:57 "Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit? " Yes, it should. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 17:05:03 Well dont worry whether people like it ot not, soon we will be forced to drink it. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:06:39 "True, but these are used because with fertilizers and irrigation, you can have 3 crops a year vs the 1 you would get in a normal climate. " The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 17:12:10 ` Desert landscaping is popular in the southwest. This is more of a problem in the Southeast, especially the Atlanta metro area.' Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. You don't even need to water your lawn for it to grow. If however, you do not cut your grass, you will have a jungle. The problem is people use retarded strains of grass. This is pretty much the problem everywhere though. If you just let what would naturally grow grow, then you'd either have a dirt yard, or a jungle that you mow back. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:13 "The sad thing is we're approaching too little water and we produce way too much food." This is because of the fucking retards who think that going to biofuel is the answer, even though they ignore the fact that aglobbiests force corn on everyone when corn is one of the shittist sources for biofuels. We produce too much shit food because politicians are getting paid off too much to keep retarded subsidies in place and generally bend over for the ag lobby. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:12:51 "Water is not the issue for grass in the southeast, retard. " Actually lately it is. You're aware of the drought conditions there aren't you? charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:13:33 I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow. Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist Mon Mar 15 17:13:43 'Its called reverse osmosis. It works fine but people seem to have a problem with drinking recycled waste water. ' There is not even 1 drop of water on the entire planet that has not at some point been through the urinary tract of some animal. The planet itself recycles water, though the process is estimated at about 10000 years. charper Member Mon Mar 15 17:14:34 Thus subsidizing unnecessary jobs rather than face the actual problem. licker Sports Mod Mon Mar 15 17:17:08 "I dunno about your politicians but over here its more about avoiding the mass unemployment that would follow." I'm sure there's a component of that here as well, pay them to grow (or not to grow, but that's not the issue here) crops which aren't worth enough on the market to otherwise be grown. Then they have to find an excuse for whey they should grow it. Enter biofuels (which are fine, when done properly) and the corn (ethanol) lobby and everything stops making sense. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:20:22 Neverwoods, " On a second thought i might have made a conversion error, yes sure then 1.1 Still means little as explained about taxes." Well what are the tax differences?And to be more specific are you talking about strictly taxes that go toward paying social welfare programs or are you including foreign aid and such as well. " OZ, why add in Australia? " I used OZ simply because they are actually number one at 18%, the US is at 15%, I wasn't trying to compare them really, just stating that they were actually even higher than the US. Although, you had made a claim that because of SW programs Euro nations did not need as many charity workers, and AFAIK OZ has similar SW programs. " To some small single nations? Compared to the hole EU, it can't be. Go ahead and add up the numbers in the last link." It goes by a % of total pop., so I could add up all the EU nations and get an avg. if you would like. " They do but never to the extent US gives." What about Greece? isn't that political aid? " It's not about that, it's just to show US is not some kind of biggest giver in AID as some might claim. " If that is the case, then you and I are in agreement. As I've said before, I think the biggest discrepancies come from HOW we give, not the amount. " We do things differently yes. US hopes to bring the best out of people by charity work, while EU countries do it in tax. " So far you and I are 100% in agreement. " we do give money to churches but that is also in form of taxes" The US gives to Churches both in private donation and taxes (taxes only if they can prove they provide social benefits with the money) Charper, " Maybe the thread wouldnt have failed so bad if the title had been more correct." 100 posts, and spawned a 2nd thread already at 30, does not seem failed to me. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:23:29 " charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 06:46:39 Its simply a different mindset - habebe and his ilk having a much more selfish mindset of course, thats why the common concept in the developed world about wanting to share your income for a fellow countrymans good is unfathomable to him. We, in the rest of the developed world, have a modern, humanistic, egalitarian mindset, where its a natural part of our ideology to have empathy and solidarity with the less fortunate in our societies. If we only cared about ourselves and our own health, like these haters of the less successful in society, we wouldnt want to put our money into someone elses welfare, we'd save it for our own welfare, dumbass. Noone in the countries with evolved welfare think that they should pay for welfare in case they themselves one day end up homeless and starving, thats just Fox viewers who cannot understand social empathy. Basically, the difference is our cultures in the rest of the world are social and cooperative, habebes little "Why should I have to pay for the lazy and stupid" corner is the opposite, its about competing with everyone instead. When we see someone ill on a bench in our countries we think of him as a colleague in our village that needs help, habebes nasty ilk think of him, their own countryman, as a lazy rival that should be left to starve. " " charper Member Sun Mar 14 07:06:50 Dumdumdum... Entire developed world minus habebes righties in USA: "We demand and vote democratically for a system where we pay 10 bucks a week from our wages to welfare because our social ethics have evolved to where we dont believe people should have to starve in parks in rich 1st world countries. On top of that we also pay about 1 dollar to charities, total sum 11 dollars" habebes righties in USA: "We dont want to pay a penny from our wages to welfare, why should we pay for the stupid and lazy? Tell them to get a job. Also we'll pay 1,5 dollars a week, total sum $1,5." ^ Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " Need I post more? charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:24:32 Thanks for proving my point dumbass lol charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:30:56 Ive continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them, just most of them. Not the USA. Dumbass. God youre such a waste of time. "habebes righties in USA:" "habebes righties in USA:" "Do you really see the right-winged people as all gun toting, Christian, poor hating greedy fat cats" No, but a lot of the american righties." "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:30:37 There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:39:10 Its not about me being great unintelligent one, I keep repeating that this is common outside your right wing world in the rest of the civilized world, its about your lot being bad. The Rep party is the party of the stupid, ill educated and greedy. Such people obviously vote, and thats who they vote for. " "charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:42:13 Everyone who votes to share their wages with their hungry or ill countrymen is more generous than those who dont, quite obviously. In all the developed world except the right part of the USA" charper Member Sat Mar 13 08:57:59 Again, "There are conservative intellectuals who dispute welfare programs for reasons that they dont work as well as this, that or another theory, but most US righties just vaguely understand that what they're talking about means sharing less of their money and thats all they want to hear and care about. " "The Con empathy neatly in a nutshell. Even if the entire rest of the civilized world was wrong and your little neo-con minority was right, it STILL OBVIOUSLY shows the difference in empathy and willingness to sacrifice a little for the hungry and ill. " "Somehow, in his poor, ignorant foxnews brain, he thinks this proves he's more generous rofl... " etc etc etc fucking waste of time... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:32:02 Nimatzo, " Does it remove all the bacteria, hormones that we piss out and shit?" I do know that the US military has a water filtration pump (hand held) that claims to be able to pump drinkable water from raw sewage. Milton Bradley, " I can buy an R/O system for my whole house for $150 at home depot. How is this too expensive? Cities already use R/O to clean water, which is then pumped into resevoirs or used as irrigation for farmland. Drinking water, though, is off limits for reclaimed wastewater. This is idiocy, in all honesty." The problem is the energy costs. " Areas that have either no or limited surface water or groundwater may choose to desalinate seawater or brackish water to obtain drinking water. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination, although 85 percent of desalinated water is produced in multistage flash plants.[3] Large reverse osmosis and multistage flash desalination plants are used in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia. The energy requirements of the plants are large, but electricity can be produced relatively cheaply with the abundant oil reserves in the region. The desalination plants are often located adjacent to the power plants, which reduces energy losses in transmission and allows waste heat to be used in the desalination process of multistage flash plants, reducing the amount of energy needed to desalinate the water and providing cooling for the power plant." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis#Desalination habebe Member Mon Mar 15 18:35:22 " ve continually pointed out to you that IM talking about the right half of the USA and not even all of them," I listed political affiliation. Do you know what that means? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and _______political affiliations.__________" charper Member Mon Mar 15 18:43:12 Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation, you fucking waste of time? Oh wait - more pulling fantasies out of your ass lol. Much like I just proved you did with this entire thread in fact. Thats the second thread you've owned yourself in while trying to own someone else lol... Im sorry dumbass, but you're relegated to the same ignorant redneck box that garyduh and kargen belong in, you waste time with idiocy, and having learned that about you, it would be folly to ever do anything but laugh at you from now on. You keep revealing your redneck stereotype ignorance of Europe, with comments like: "In Europe the water is mauve and the sky is spotted." European poster: "No its fucking not" Habebe: "yes it is, heres an article in the Washington Times" European poster: "No its fucking not. I live here, I pass lakes, the sea, I rink and bathe in water everyday here in Europe and you've never set your foot here. The water is NOT mauve and the sky is NOT spotted" Habebe: "yes it is. Look, heres a link to new york post" Youre a waste of time dumdumdum... habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? Charper, My advice to you is that it's sometimes better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:36:27 " habebe Member Mon Mar 15 16:33:12 " Actually I do not think that Americans are generally greedier than anyone else" Thats my stance as well. And for many I'd say your reasoning makes sense. However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations. charper Member Mon Mar 15 16:42:56 Nope, never claimed that. " Does that clear anything up for you? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:24:41 http://www...ami_relief_giving_12-23-05.pdf red states vs blue stats donations. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 20:32:10 Neverwoods, What is the point of that? NeverWoods Member Mon Mar 15 20:49:11 Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:22:00 I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:26:39 My point is that it does not take into account income, if bill gates donates 10k and jo schmo donates 9k, who is more charitable? http://www...05-11-20-national-giving_x.htm 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia. 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-20-state-giving_x.htm The complete list habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:29:50 " I think the point is that generally and historically the Left has always cared for human beings and human concern, while the right are busy being concerned about property rights." I beg to differ. That seems to be coming from a left-wing opinion. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:12 How exactly are property rights NOT human concern? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:34:22 Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:42:12 " Just take a look at the world. Even when it is lip service generally that is the case. " Well, then you start to get into what is considered left, and what is considered right. China for example is considered extremely left wing (communist) and we all know that Human rights is not their issue. Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations. " Oh and apparently, income has very little to do with how frequently people give to charity." How frequently? I'd say that how much is given is a greater indicator. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:46:27 >>How exactly are property rights NOT human concern?<< What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:52:05 >>China for example is considered extremely left wing<< China is an authoritarian shithole, trust me that is the correct political label. There is nothing left wing about it. >>Even in democratic left-wing nations things such as freedom of speech and individual rights seem to be of less concern than in more Right-wing nations.<< You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:53:01 http://www...oluntary-organisations-charity This is a list by % of population that volunteers through a charity. Australia: 18% US: 15% Netherlands:9% Ireland:7% Norway:7% Canada:6% Belgium:6% Germany:5% Finland:5% UK:5% Sweden and France also tied with 5 %. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 21:56:38 " You seriously mean that you know of no authoritarian right-wing nations where freedom of speech is not only a lesser concern, but actually forbidden?" Which goes back to my point of what constitutes "right wing" and "left-wing" I would consider the US for example as right of center, and most of Europe as left of center. But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 21:59:46 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_index Even if the USA is considered a full democracy according to this standard, you will notice that it scores considerably lower than countries which are socialistic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:00:52 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index Same thing here. eds Member Mon Mar 15 22:02:51 The US tax code is also one of the most generous for those that donate. That is the only reason Americans privately donate at a higher rate than other nations. Let's not discuss official US foreign aid, which is just embarrassing frankly. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:04:03 >>But that is from a US perspective, we need to agree on what we consider left and right before we can label who concerns themselves with what.<< Since you were talking about extremes it should not matter unless either of us is insane. Both those wiki links clearly shows that democratic left wing societies are clearly more free and democratic than the USA. Not to say that the USA is not free nor democratic. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:08:01 Nimatzo, Well, I'd be curious what the 60 questions are, because what is considered a civil liberty in the US is not always considered a CL in another nation. For example private firearms ownership is a major civil liberties issue in the US, in most of Europe it is not. And unfortunately the wiki page does not say what the 60 questions are. Also, the banning of political parties, in the US even the banning of non-democratic political parties would be strongly frowned upon as inherently un-democratic, while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:12:42 It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:14:43 >>while it is common practice in places like Germany and considered to further the cause of Democracy.<< I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house? Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:14 Especially when it already happened to you, say 30 years ago. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:15:49 As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire? " Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It really depends, there are limits, but to be honest the US tax code is ridiculously complicated Also it varies in each of the 50 states as well as DC, so there are 52 seperate tax codes. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:17:26 I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:19:11 >>As for the freedom of press part, again, the methods are vague. "The report is based on a questionnaire" But what is the questionnaire?<< It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! http://www.rsf.org/Questionnaire-for-compiling-the.html Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:20:41 http://a33...F/Democracy%20Index%202008.pdf Here is the full break down for the Democracy index. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:23:18 And yes the questions are there too. Cloud Strife Member Mon Mar 15 22:26:11 ` What an odd question. Clearly everything is human concern, but in the light of what I said when property, property values and property rights take lead over the rights of humans, the care and well being of humans it goes from human concern to something humans should be worried about.' Property rights are rights of humans, dumbass. You don't actually think it's the property that has any say in the matter do you? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:27:41 " It is based on how people perceive it, which is the only way to conduct such a study." But what are the questions they use to come to those conclusions? " I could easily make argument for that. If someone you know would the moment he was given the chance burn your house down and kill you and your family, would you still invite him to your house?" That isn't a very good analogy. It's hard to compare the right of expression to the right of murder/arson. But again, I think there is more than meets the eye, because we do things differnetly than most of Europe. In the US we have a very slow moving federal government. Where as nations like Germany with a parlimentary system have a less slowly moving government, it is much easier to change federal laws in Germany than the US. If one single party in Germany had the majority in all branches of the federal government I'm sure they could very easily pass/change laws. As you can tell now the US Democrats have a majority in BOTH the house and the Senate, and control the Presidency, and yet they still can not pass/change that much. So it makes more sense that we allow more "fringe" parties because they pose less of a threat to us. To change the constitution of the US it takes not just votes in the house/Senate but the approval of 2/3 of the 51 smaller governments. (50 states and the district of Columbia) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:29:05 " It's right there at the bottom of the screen!! " OOps, my fault, sorry. I'm gonna read over these so I might not respond for a bit. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:31:55 To correct my earlier post, it is not 2/3.. " There are 2 ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. The first way is for two thrids of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate) to propose a constitutional amendment. Once this happens, the proposed amendment is submitted to the states. The legislatures of 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment. At this point, it becomes part of the constitution. The president has no official role in amendment the constitution (he doesn't have to sign the amendment for it to take effect, and can do nothing to defeat a constitutional amendment once it has passed). Of course, unofficially, presidents can use their political clout to influence public opinion one way or another, which can affect the chances of a constitutional amendment passing. The second method starts with the states, and was likely included to give states a check on overreaching federal power. The legislatures of the states apply to congress for a convention to propose amendments to the constitution. If 2/3 of the states make such applications, congress must call the convention. Once such a convention is called, and amendments are proposed, the amendment(s) must be ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states. This method has never actually been used to amend the constitution, but Congress has proposed amendments in response to threats by states to call a convention, likely to retain some control over the amendment process. " http://wik...the_US_Constitution_be_amended habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:33:29 " I am not a fan of banning political parties, but I can easily appreciate the arguments made for it. I do not consider what countries like Germany do a slippery slope, because it is aimed solely at those who against democracy and the democratic process. People who would destroy that system the first chance they got." I also dislike it, but because of how there system works I understand it.It is not exactly black and white because of the difference in how our gov.'s work. Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:42:22 >>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:47:15 " 19. Journalists who had to be accompanied by bodyguards or use security measures (such as bulletproof jackets or armoured vehicles) while doing their work?" Well, my questions on these sorts of questions is does this count war-journalists? I mean obviously they would have to have more protection.And is this on US soil or any US Journalist? " 21. Journalists from privately-owned media outlets forced to stop working because of harassment, threats or political pressure?" This brings up the question of what defines harrasment, if a talk show host uses say a raciist slur and pisses off his viewers and they protest the station and he then gets fired is that harrasment? is it political pressure? or is it the guy is not liked? Also if he is fired from one job and then takes another somewhere else immidiatley, does that count? " 27. Routine self-censorship in the privately-owned media? Give a score from 0 (none) to 5 (strong self-censorship)." Is self-censorship anti-free speech? Free speech flows both ways you do not have to say what you do not want to say. " 48. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers (how many?) imprisoned for more than two days?" Are people threatening violence considered dissidents? habebe Member Mon Mar 15 22:48:43 Also, I do not know about the rest of the world, but at least in the US reporters/media mostly have a "Liberal bias" (liberal in the US is considered left-wing) habebe Member Mon Mar 15 23:20:05 The economist gives Sweden a 10/10 for both political participation and Civil rights. Which immidiatley brings up the Issue on gun control to me. I know most of Europe is very strict on GC.But to be honest I do not know what Sweden's gun laws are, do they ban Hand guns for example? " 6. Do laws provide for broadly equal campaigning opportunities?" Does this mean that they have relativley equal amounts of money or the oppurtunity to gain as much money as possible? " 14. Is the legislature the supreme political body, with a clear supremacy over other branches of government?" In the US we beleive in "checks and balances" and that it would un-democratic for one branch of government to be more powerful than the other two, but they seem to differ here. " 18. Special economic, religious or other powerful domestic groups do not exercise significant political power, parallel to democratic institutions?" Perhaps I'm reading this wrong. When they say parallel, do they mean that certain institutions have a large influence on votes, or have political power other than influencing votes? " 25. Public confidence in government" This seems inherently bias toward Socialism, as they trust their government to run many more things such as HC, and the economy. " 29. Women in parliament" Does this count nations that have mandatory quotas for women in government? I'll finish up tommorow, I'm falling asleep trying to read this, and getting to the point where I'm re-reading it 2-3 times cause I'm tired. G'night charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:52:57 Poor ole Habebe, ranting himself into new pwnge lol charper Member Tue Mar 16 04:55:57 "habebe Member Mon Mar 15 19:35:19 " Where did you list political affiliation in your accusation" Um, did you not read my post? " yes you fucking lying retard lol "However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/" Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. charper Member Tue Mar 16 05:21:04 "Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " Ive already asked him to hazard a guess how much he thinks they'd contribute to charity if they paid as much as the rest of the developed world does to welfare and if charity wasnt a tax dodge, but of course, he ignored and continued ranting like a McCarthy lunatic instead lol habebe Member Tue Mar 16 08:44:02 " Nope, you lying turd, just the righties. You stupid, lying little slug. Kill yourself. With slug poison. " Seriously, you just cut off the end of my quote, the part saying political affiliation You do realize how retarded you look, don't you? " However this is the 2nd thread from the original thread 'Charper owned" where Charper (and perhaps NW/Saiko) were claiming that the US was greedier/less generous due to a variety of claims from foreign aid, to social welfare and political affiliations." NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 10:58:25 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage? " I forgot this even, for Americans to pay a substantial amount in donation you seem to need to invite another element of greed to make them do it. The capitalist greed machine? xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:00:47 Nimatzo Member Mon Mar 15 22:06:32 "Right, I keep forgetting about that. Is the full value of what you donate tax deductible or a percentage?" It's fully deductable up to a point, after which no further contributions are deductable. And NW, voluntary charity with incentives is still better than involuntary charity. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 11:04:26 Give to the greedy so they will give to the needy. That is more in involuntary charity then the system we have. Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:09:06 " Most socialist countries believe or not like to pay higher taxes for some of that causes." Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc. xyz1 Member Tue Mar 16 11:10:04 It's hardly giving, since taxation is a form of TAKING AWAY a person's money. And it's hardly a financial winner for a charity giver. A person who is solidly in the 35% tax bracket and gives $10,000.00 to charity reduces his tax obligation by $3,500.00 but loses that $10,000.00 that he gives away. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:11:34 Not to mention that they receive DIRECT BENEFITS from this "giving", it is not charity to pay for a service. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 11:21:45 http://www...ocial-contributions-of-revenue As for Social contributions by revenue. NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 12:55:19 "Even in the US most people are glad to pay taxes for things like roads, military, courts etc." Are you serious? The gov actually invests in infrastructure?! Heavy stuff, i don't know any other western country gov that actual invests in infrastructure. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 12:56:43 NW, What country are you from? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:00:20 I was sarcastic. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:03:55 I know it was. I'm just curious, I thought you were from Sweden, but I'm not positive. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:05:10 Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not so what Member Tue Mar 16 13:06:04 why are there so few europeans from other countries? NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:10:23 Well, then we'll consider you a citizen of the EU. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:11:10 " why are there so few europeans from other countries?" No clue, but I've wondered that before as well. Nekran Member Tue Mar 16 13:15:13 "Most of the Euro's on these boards of from Scandinavia.Shannon/Seb are the only ones I know that are not" Me and saiko are belgian. Goreth is austrian iirc. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:18:58 I stand Corrected. Rugian Member Tue Mar 16 13:24:36 NeverWoods Member Tue Mar 16 13:07:51 If i tell you that Rugian will finally get to pin me to a country, he has me down for 3 different countries. ;) Let's be fair now. It's either the Netherlands or Belgium; that's 2, not 3. habebe Member Tue Mar 16 13:29:34 Damn he wasn't kidding, Rugian hasn't been in this thread the whole time and like 30 minutes after here he is trying to to figure out what nation he's from. Cloud Strife Member Tue Mar 16 13:34:34 `charity wasnt a tax dodge' Charity isn't a tax dodge. Tax-deductible doesn't mean (make money by doing this). You still lose more money than you would by just paying taxes. This is because tax deductible is basically saying you paid 100% of taxes on deductible part of your income. God you fucking euros are retarded. `>>Property rights are rights of humans<< Not when they are valued higher than human beings. ' Like what the hell does this shitty reply even mean? Property rights are rights of human beings to own things for themselves. It's a good thing, a very nice thing, and yet you think that ownership somehow demeans human beings, that somehow owning crap puts more value on a right than a human being. God you people are fucking retarded. show deleted posts
Prophet Bush Member	Tue Mar 16 19:13:01 'But mainly, Bush happened. And that lesson isn't forgotten yet.' This has got to be most retarded statement I have ever had the severe displeasure of hearing. Bush was a great hero, perhaps the greatest who ever lived. He stood against the evil of Islam, and all of it followers, and if it were not for his grand vision and guidance, you would all be being fucked up the ass by angry mullahs and clerics. PRAISE PROPHET BUSH! HALLOWED BE HIS NAME!
garyd Member	Wed Mar 17 00:03:45 The chief problem most Euro's had with Bush is simply that a reality in which some follwers of Islam truly are dangerous does not fit in well with a world view that procalims the West is basically an evil selfish oligarchy and the USA by dint of it's refusal to accept this supposed fact especially on the right of the political equation, is the most evil of all. Hence idiots like chaper hate the wrong people and view anyone that tries to show them the truth with extreme suspicion if not out right hatred.
Clitoral Hood The Bloody Scourge	Wed Mar 17 02:04:32 I know some rational righties. they also happen to be non-practicing in their religions. way I see it, religion should have ended with the jews. the BS they made up worked out great to keep them alive way back when. why the fuck did some idiot (X2, YA DUMB FUCKS) try to update and improve the god we invented? sort of thing that you look back and say "well, we had good intentions..."
Nekran Member	Wed Mar 17 02:46:21 "The chief problem most Euro's had with Bush is simply that a reality in which some follwers of Islam truly are dangerous does not fit in well with a world view that procalims the West is basically an evil selfish oligarchy and the USA by dint of it's refusal to accept this supposed fact especially on the right of the political equation, is the most evil of all." LOL... yeah you know Europe all right. Damn...
USTARD New Member	Wed Mar 17 03:43:19 "The chief problem most Euro's had with Bush is simply that a reality in which some follwers of Islam" And these danfgerous people were in Iraq planing evil things, we had to invade, Bush was inspired by God!!!
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 03:49:06 " Bush was inspired by God!!! " Nope you have it backwards, he was inspired by a dog.Checkers rose from the grave and spoke to him.
charper Member	Wed Mar 17 04:05:23 lol...garyduh explains the world...
charper Member	Wed Mar 17 04:46:11 In fact, garyduh, just by sheer manifestation of his presence in this thread, answers the OP.
Alex Member	Wed Mar 17 07:15:52 What went wrong? Europe is full of homos and muslims. That's what went wrong.
Clitoral Hood The Bloody Scourge	Wed Mar 17 11:13:00 "Bush was inspired by God!!!" this makes USTARD a terrorist, right? inspiring terror in others = terrorist after all.
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 11:22:02 " Europe is full of homos and muslims. " So is the US, so what's the problem?
so what Member	Wed Mar 17 11:58:57 The US has always been more a heterogenous society compared with the European nationstates. It's easier to show solidarity and share with people who are like you than with people who look and talk different. Although unity is a major doctrine in America, people are racists by nature. Now with the increase of immigrants in Europe, you see that the support for such show of solidarity decrease in correlation with the amount of foreign immigrants. Europe is becoming more like America.
Seb Member	Wed Mar 17 13:43:04 Garyd: "The chief problem most Euro's had with Bush is simply that a reality in which some follwers of Islam truly are dangerous" *sigh* Leaving asside from the large generalisations against a substantial fraction of Europes population that would make such a broad brush approach somethign no European government could accept (Demonise a fraction of your citizens on the basis of ethno/religious identity?... yeah... something generally frowned on after WWII), is Islam more dangerous than Communism? NAZIism? Fuck no, take a reality check and get some perspective. "does not fit in well with a world view that procalims the West is basically an evil selfish oligarchy" Which is an entirely fictional world view for the purposes of this conversation, but hey ho... "and the USA by dint of it's refusal to accept this supposed fact especially on the right of the political equation, is the most evil of all." The problem is what msot of Europe assocaites with the West, particularly the universality of the rule of Law, human rights, establishment of international norms and violence as an action of last resort (all of which were pioneered by America, incidentaly) is not what the US Righties consider hall-marks of Western Civilisation (Free Market capitalism, market de-regulation, superiority of WASP values, economic and military superiority as a necessity rather than an emergent benefit). This is exacerbated when combined with a contrarian attitude to foreign relations and a strong belief in American exceptionalism to all things (the great irony is that America ceased to be exceptional when Europe adopted it's ideals after WWII, and is now seeking to demonstrate it's exceptionalism by reverting to the norms of the typical 19th century European great power). so what: It's all about race? The general characterisation of Europe is of a de-militarised socialist state. I don't see how growing miniorities are going to change that view. Equally, growing immigration rather than make people believe that state benefits and entitlements should be devalured, just simply lead to people thinking that these benefits should be ringfenced from immigrants who have to earn such priveledges. As to attitudes to rule of law, consensual decision making etc. on an international setting, again, that has nothign to do with immigration at all.
Seb Member	Wed Mar 17 13:43:34 If you look at it, America is more becoming like Europe, with a growing hostility to immigration which historically it has welcomed.
Seb Member	Wed Mar 17 13:44:28 In terms of international relations, the problem for most Europeans is that America looks increasingly like some 19th century European throwback in it's behvariour... and we already know whwere that leads to.
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 13:54:50 " If you look at it, America is more becoming like Europe, with a growing hostility to immigration which historically it has welcomed." I think this is passing fad IMO, exacerbated by two major issues. 1) Economics, people see huge unemployment levels and tend to blame it on Mexican immigrants. 2)The cartel wars at the Mexican border are heating up, dozens getting murdered daily, probably more than in Iraq/Afghanistan.
Forwyn Member	Wed Mar 17 14:16:57 "If you look at it, America is more becoming like Europe, with a growing hostility to immigration which historically it has welcomed." Chinese, Irish, laws against SE Europeans, etc. Groups that were coming in in very high rates were never welcomed. Then again, at least those groups tried to adapt to the culture.
Seb Member	Wed Mar 17 14:23:33 Forwyn: Socially, perhaps not welcomed. But there was given far less legal expression than it is now. "Then again, at least those groups tried to adapt to the culture." Spoken like a true frenchman!
Forwyn Member	Wed Mar 17 14:29:45 http://en....United_States_Immigration_Acts I'll admit there weren't talks of building walls with concrete gun nests back then, but illegal immigration wasn't an issue(or considered an issue) back then. But legal immigrants of certain ethnicities were severely restricted. "Spoken like a true frenchman!" Hey, I try.
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 14:32:07 " But legal immigrants of certain ethnicities were severely restricted. " Not to mention loophole laws, like banning of ponytails, opium being aimed at Chinese laborers. But Seb is right that in general immigration has usually been promoted more than it was argued against.
charper Member	Wed Mar 17 15:18:06 "Chinese, Irish, laws against SE Europeans, etc. Groups that were coming in in very high rates were never welcomed. " Both have belonged to the bottom of societies criminal class as immigrants in different countries, the Irish for centuries in fact. Hint hint geddit? The immigrants in the lowest most ill adapted classes in different countries come from a wide range of different countries, not just niggers and mooslims.
charper Member	Wed Mar 17 15:19:59 What happened to: Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
YouAreFuckingStupid Member	Wed Mar 17 16:40:00 Americans are individualistic, religious, and rugged. Europeans are collective, secular, and sissy.
licker Sports Mod	Wed Mar 17 16:55:41 "What happened to: Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! " They became politicians and dragged the whole country down. Or more seriously, when the country needed bodies that thinking applied. Now that we no longer need an influx of labor (or no longer desire it, either way) it ceases to apply.
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 16:57:29 Licker, We don't need an influx of labor for the short-term. Long term though we do need it.
licker Sports Mod	Wed Mar 17 16:59:38 Well point is that we don't need tired poor huddled masses as laborers anymore. The economy is in a vastly different place where unskilled labor is essentially useless. At least if you are a legal resident...
habebe Member	Wed Mar 17 17:00:55 True, we need more educated/specialist workers now.
	show deleted posts