Tales from a lawfirm

[Blingy]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

land should not be for profit!

You're right, it should be free and open so everybody can live like this.

https://www.realchangenews.org/sites...?itok=1zUoVgZx

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by alphys [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

Many landlords, if not most, are simply providing housing to people. It is often a primary source of income, and if they have a tenant go delinquent it can seriously affect their ability to provide for their own family. Do you care about that at all? Or do you just hate "the rich" (who are often not really that rich).

You are not entitled to another person's property. If your landlord is shitty, that's one thing. But more often than not, it's shitty tenants fucking up the property and exploiting the system.

Many landlords provide low income earners the opportunity to not just live on the street. Show a little gratitude.

EDIT: This always bares repeating: Hating the rich is not the same thing as caring about the poor. More than likely you are mad at your lot in life and are desperate to blame somebody else; IE landlords.

[Nexii]

Ironic because most landlords don't want to rent to families in Canada, noise from kids and such. And yea discrimination happens all the time one way or the other about this, but you'd be dumb to put it in writing...

[Jibartik]

I think if we're going to live in a prison of our own constructs, sitting at red lights at midnight with nobody in sight for miles and sending money to the IRS.

We may as well add one that says rich people cant have more than 2 houses.

[Jibartik]

Who cares replace all of that with computer system.

[alphys]

Its really just that simple. No explanation needed. Same default group as money lenders with ursury.

pc run government would be only safe and stable system because of inherent human flaws.

BUT WHO PROGRAMMED THE PC BROOOOOOO

Anywya, we are heading towards Ayn Rand " Anthem "

PS Landlords are total scum and personal property over 100k should be abolished.

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by alphys [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

PS Landlords are total scum and personal property over 100k should be abolished.

That is absurd, who are you, hitler? Please tell me how to live mein furrrror!!

Who are you to decree how much money somebody wants or needs? What if they have 10 kids to support? What if they live modestly but employ and pay 200 people healthily? You're just jealous of rich people.

[Ooloo]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

[Whale biologist]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

no its not, braggart.

[imperiouskitten]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

not really at all. if a highly evolved, highly stratified civilization has .1% of the population personally owning and controlling most of the machinery of the earth, the argument clearly falls apart. We are arriving in time at that civilization. It is clearly not an argument from the personal but one from practicality, much as you might like to make it all about ego wars by framing it in a childish way.

Yes, the rich will have to pay an "unfairly high" share of taxes in a highly stratified future, if your conception of the world is like goo goo ga ga. Epic win. On the other hand, they have to do this because what they own is so insanely valuable that no human being ever should have been declared to "own" so much in the first place, so I wouldn't cry too much for the cruelty of it. "Just desserts" for the vast majority would be a sentence too ugly to write here, so I hardly think it is a wise rhetorical move to bring in fairness.

Luckily, I am pretty sure this post is just bait [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] nobody perceives their civic duty in such a low, self-serving manner as to see everyone around them in the same pathological way no? Some odd norms in play. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]