• Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    ↪GRWelsh


    Trump's team is preparing to falsely claim that mail-in ballots counted after Nov. 3 — a legitimate count expected to favor Democrats — are evidence of election fraud.

    And this article was published days before the election. I guess they’re psychics. Only explanation. Definitely not because any thinking person could see it beforehand.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    he clearly had a plan ahead of time to declare victory regardless of the election results. — GRWelsh

    Which is so obvious even a Trump supporter will deny it.
  • Climate change denial
    ↪Agree to Disagree


    Another climate denial retort. What a shocker.

    So I’m seeing now that you’re just a fairly average climate denier coming here to spread old, tired canards. Scroll up for responses.

    Let me guess:

    - The climate is always changing.

    - Climate scientists the world over are involved in some kind of conspiracy involving controlling people for a New World Order.

    - Climate change is happening, but it’s from natural variation, not CO2 buildup.

    - Celebrities and scientists use planes/cars/anything involving fossil fuels— bam, climate change is refuted.

    - CO2 is good for us.

    Etc etc.

    Look about right? Thought so.

    Why not run along before embarrassing yourself further about a subject of which you’re completely ignorant? :up:
  • Climate change denial
    Democrats: It's raining.
    Republicans: No it's not.
    Media (without bothering to look out the window): There's a political dispute about whether or not it's raining.

    Just saw this. Accurate.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    “It was also very sad driving through Washington, D.C., and seeing the filth and the decay, and all of the broken buildings and walls and the graffiti. This is not the place that I left.”

    Comedy gold.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Imagine a candidate losing an election, and claiming the loss was because of millions of votes from the Moon People.

    Then everyone has to dissect whether or not there really are Moon People, whether the candidate “really” believes it, etc— and 50/60 million people end up believing it.

    There’s just as much evidence for Moon People as there is for voter fraud or a stolen election.

    All of these legal proceedings for the ramblings of a narcissistic man/child. It’s an incredible sight. And watching the supporters contort themselves into mental pretzels is astonishing.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I didn’t fail the test mom — the teacher is out to get me.

    Trump supporter defense. Airtight.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    That will be trivially easy. The election was legit. His own people told him that - Pence, Barr, Wray, Krebs, etc, etc. They will testify as such in court. And there are 1000s of election officials all across the country who have stated that the election was fair - I'm sure they would be willing to testify if called upon.

    It's now been over 2 & 1/2 years and yet there is no evidence of any fraud that would have altered the outcome. All Trump's lawyers have is just hand waving.     — EricH

    And dozens of court cases, where the lawyers were laughed out of court. Also, look no further than Arizona -- where the Arizona senate-commissioned "Cyber Ninjas" conducted their 9 million dollar "audit" and found ugatz: https://www.americanoversight.org/records-reveal-high-cost-of-security-contractors-for-arizona-election-audit

    Trump was saying the election was going to be stolen if he lost long before the election, and so any thinking person knew he was going to say it was stolen if he lost. I was calling it long beforehand -- as anyone would. It wasn't going to matter if it was the cleanest election in history -- which it turned out to be -- or if there were massive glitches.

    (We knew, for example, that mail-in votes, which are counted later, would swing democratic because Trump was screaming about voter fraud and telling his followers to go in person. So his numbers spiked at the beginning, and gradually tapered off...which was expected--again-- by anyone with a thinking mind. He seized on this, of course, pretended he didn't know it, and made out like the election was someone being stolen from him.)

    What's sad about all this is that we even have to talk about the predictable tantrum-ramblings of a man-child. It's so very obvious it's all bullshit -- it didn't need to go to the courts, or have million-dollar audits, or anything else. It was all fabricated, predictably, by a man who psychologically cannot lose. In his mind, he cannot be a loser. What did we think he would do, concede graciously?

    If our country was rational, a person like this would be relegated to the fringes of society, easily ignored. But we have to go on about it because 30% of the country actually believes this stuff. Sad indeed.
  • Climate change denial
    political will to regulate industries, which are the material if not the final cause of climate change. Well that's exactly what I suggested people could be persuaded to do, essentially curtailing their own worst tendencies, indirectly. — Pantagruel

    :up:

    Sounded as if you were saying something along the carbon footprint line, which directs responsibility on the consumer a la the tobacco industry of yore. But if you weren’t saying that — my fault for misreading.

    ↪unenlightened


    Yes. After COVID, I think people got a sense of just how quickly governments can move if they want to. Prior to that, at least in the states, the example was WWII — but that’s simply not as visceral (or remembered).
  • Climate change denial
    People and their inherent stupidity, their willingness to project problems on others while completely ignoring their own culpability, are definitely at the heart of this problem. — Pantagruel

    Which is the same excuse fossil fuel companies give. Just lower your carbon footprint. Never mind that the entire continent of Africa emits only 4% of global emissions a one ton per capita. Their “inherent stupidity” and “ignoring their own culpability” is the “real” problem.

    Give me a break. The issue is that the wealthier nations have benefited from fossil fuels for over a century and have crippled government ability to do anything about it. Despite having the solutions right in front of us.

    If ordinary people are responsible for anything it’s allowing themselves to be fooled by propaganda. But even there the fight has never been fair.
  • Climate change denial
    Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll. — Pantagruel

    To come here and announce “Give me any solution and I will tell you why it won’t work,” use an example of cows, declare “good luck with that,” and expect to be taken seriously, is exactly the issue. Whether it’s truly trolling or just childishness, I don’t know.
  • Climate change denial
    People have to reduce their demand to have any hope of "solving" climate change. — Agree to Disagree

    No, they don’t.

    Please tell me any solution that you have and I will tell you why it won't work. — Agree to Disagree

    Like with the ludicrous cow example? Where you simply declare “good luck with that”? That’s not an analysis— it’s childish nonsense.

    I’m not interested in the armchair thoughts of a random internet guy, or what s/he thinks is possible or isn’t possible. The facts are quite clear; the climate scientists are quite clear. The solutions are already available and being employed. I’ll repeat: the issue is time and political will. For some industries, like cement and steel, we’ll need more funding and research— even though technologies already exist that look promising.

    But like I said, if you want to go on believing that it’s impossible, for whatever reason, you’re welcome.
  • Climate change denial
    Many people are concerned about cows because they produce methane. — Agree to Disagree

    And your answer is “good luck trying to reduce numbers.” Got it. Excellent analysis.

    Who are you and why are you trolling this thread?
  • Climate change denial
    The companies are only supplying what people demand. — Agree to Disagree

    It’s true that this is a common myth used by industry, but it’s on par with the “carbon footprint”: a way to divert blame to the individual consumer and away from the corporation. It’s brilliant propaganda, no doubt.

    Exxon knew about the risks of climate change for decades and deliberately spread misinformation about it— all for profits. To turn around and put the onus on ordinary people is a complete joke.
  • Climate change denial
    There is not much political will to do things that people don't want (if you live in a democracy). — Agree to Disagree

    People do want them.

    Please tell me some of the "plenty of solutions", and I will tell you why they won't work. — Agree to Disagree

    No thanks. If it makes you feel better, believe whatever you’d like. Doesn’t change the facts.
  • Climate change denial
    I believe that there are no solutions that aren't doomed from the start. — Agree to Disagree

    Plenty of solutions. They’re being employed as we speak. Hardly doomed. It’s a matter of time and political will.

    When 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions, it’s not hard to see what the problem is.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-indictment-jack-smith-2020-election-4b351abf?mod=mhp

    “Today’s indictment serves as an important reminder: Anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States,” — Joe Biden

    Reveal
    Oops—wait, that was Mike Pence.
  • Climate change denial
    ↪jorndoe


    We should absolutely be scared senseless. This is unprecedented in human history.
  • Climate change denial
    July is globe’s hottest month in recorded history

    “Climate change is here. It is terrifying. And it is just the beginning,” Guterres told reporters in a New York briefing. “The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived.”

    Yes indeed.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    “Republicans are high class … but they have to be a little more lower class.” — Trump
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    How is that anything but a Marie Antionette-like dismissal of the plight of the 90% of Americans who are getting screwed? — Mikie

    can tell by your attitude you are not at all interested in discussion so bye bye — I like sushi

    It’s true I’m not interested in discussing ignorant comments. Bye.

    Uummm... there's no such thing as a "true" tax rate, including paper gains on investments. — LuckyR

    They explain their calculations. The term “true tax rate” is not a technical term.

    The story’s main finding was that these 25 people saw their worth rise a collective $401 billion from 2014 to 2018 while paying a total of $13.6 billion in federal income taxes. That amounts to what we called a “true tax rate” of 3.4%.

    Below, we’ve laid out how we performed this analysis. Our story also included calculations of more typical American households in order to provide context for the ultrawealthy’s numbers, and we explain those here as well.

    https://www.propublica.org/article/how-we-calculated-the-true-tax-rates-of-the-wealthiest

    Anyway: the wealthy don’t pay as much in taxes, and in fact sometimes avoid paying anything at all. Especially on capital gains, which are already lower than what an average person pays in taxes as a percentage of income. It’s currently capped at 20% — but as the OP discusses, that’s often avoided completely.

    And it’s exactly where they house most of their wealth. They borrow off of it, and then pass it off to kids or spouse tax-free. Hence “buy, borrow, die.”
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    Frequent flights, trips to Europe, better food and alcohol, fashionable clothing and larger dwellings -- it's easy to outspend the family's combined salaries. — BC

    Sure. I heard it called “lifestyle creep.” I like that. As your salary increases, so does your spending— so you remain even, or even get into debt. But you don’t save and don’t invest.

    Who gets the biggest pieces of pie is a matter of POLICY, not talent, luck, prudent investing, or any such thing. Since the 1970s, policy makers have been steering the pie slices to the top decile of income and the very top layer of wealth, the richest .0001%. 90% of us are dividing up a couple of small pieces and arguing over the crumbs. — BC

    :100:
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    Yes, I am ignorant about US. — I like sushi

    That’s fine — so then why come to this thread, which is mostly about how the wealthy avoid paying taxes — and go on about how people should simply save more money, as if it’s easy to become “one of them”?

    How is that anything but a Marie Antionette-like dismissal of the plight of the 90% of Americans who are getting screwed?

    I do question the ‘survey’ that states that over 50% are living pay check to pay check btw. — I like sushi

    Maybe apply equal skepticism to feelings, without a basis in fact whatsoever. I have a number of other sources, if interested.
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    Well if he's got billions in income, he's theoretically paying income tax. — LuckyR

    Yes:

    Bezos paid zero federal income taxes in both 2007 and 2011. From 2006 to 2018, when Bezos' wealth increased by $127 billion, he reported a total of $6.5 billion in income. He paid $1.4 billion in personal federal taxes, a true tax rate of 1.1%.

    https://americansfortaxfairness.org/wp-content/uploads/ProPublica-Billionaires-Fact-Sheet-Updated.pdf
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    Do you think some kind of scheme should be put into place to help minimum wage workers in later life? I do. Maybe open up a pension/saving scheme to set up like I said? Good idea or bad idea? — I like sushi

    That’s fine. Most people can’t afford to invest in stocks or save “5%” a month. Most are in debt up to their eyes. So how does it get done? How about we pay them more?

    Again, real wages have stagnated. Which is why you have more debt— which is why you have people living paycheck to paycheck. To remark that “hey if you can’t beat them, join them” and that it’s “easy,” is just ignorant. Especially given the context of this thread.

    ↪BC


    This applies to some people. But look at the general trend. You know well enough that real wages have flatlined since the late 70s. That’s a robust explanatory data point. Telling people to thrift or wherever— yeah, it’s just not realistic in the context of 37% of Americans not being able to afford a $400 emergency:

    Households survey released Monday, some 37% of Americans lack enough money to cover a $400 emergency expense, up from 32% in 2021.

    https://fortune.com/2023/05/23/inflation-economy-consumer-finances-americans-cant-cover-emergency-expense-federal-reserve/amp/

    That being said — I’m in favor of consuming less and financial education.
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    Uummm... where do the loan repayments come from? — LuckyR

    That’s a good question. It’s not that Bezos has no income — he does. Millions (even billions) cash on hand. Repaying a loan isn’t difficult, especially when the interest rate is so low. But the point is to avoid paying taxes.

    You just need to start early and be disciplined. — I like sushi

    Is this a joke?

    You just have to set aside a little and put it into savings. That is how people become millionaires. It is not really that difficult if you start young. — I like sushi

    Apparently not.

    1) That is not how most people become millionaires.
    2) If it were so simple, everyone would do it. Perhaps ask yourself why they can’t. (If you think it’s laziness or lack of education, I’ll leave you to it.)

    Very, very few people today are completely unable to put aside something on a monthly basis. — I like sushi

    Hundreds of millions of people.

    When 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, are in enormous amounts of debt, don’t have a $400 emergency fund, and whose real wages have flatlined for 40 years — yeah, your thoughts on this matter are not only ignorant, but callous.
  • Buy, Borrow, Die
    ↪Relativist


    Agreed. There are many things we can do — any of them would be a start. Close these loopholes; wealth tax; higher corporate and individual taxes; higher capital gains tax; get rid of the social security cap. You name it.

    A spouse dying also works. I don't recommend it. — L'éléphant

    I guess this would fall under “die,” yeah. Rather than to kids, you have it to your spouse. The stepped-up basis applies there too.

    Expropriating the expropriators would be a simpler solution to the problem of too many way too rich people than screwing around with the complicated tax code. — BC

    Simpler in theory, but I think much more drastic and therefore less likely for success. Government taking private property isn’t a good look for most Americans.

    The tax code is complicated by design, as you know — and always manages to favor the wealthy. That can be undone just as it was done.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    Those ideas may have their place in theology or discussion within the context of shared faith, but not in philosophy, whereas the practical human wisdom (phronesis) which may be exemplified in literature, including religious scriptures, does have a place in philosophy. — Janus

    :up:

    You put it much more succinctly than I did.

    Moderator Mikie's thread on religion has been troubled by unclear communication which I think is his problem. — BC

    You’re right. See my response to unenligtened, above. I try to go over the reasons for why it’s unclear and thus misunderstood.

    Unless that is unclear as well— in which case I may have to accept the fact that maybe I suck at writing and should hang myself. :lol:
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    ↪unenlightened


    Sure, but I’m not really advocating avoidance.

    Here’s the problem with OP, I think: I’m making a lot of assumptions which are not explained and using a lot of words that I haven’t defined (e.g., philosophy, religion). (Also, that the title is too provocative, potentially evoking an adversarial response on the part of the reader.)

    I agree we all have perspectives, beliefs, and stories. In one sense, I see them all as part of a bigger whole and respect them as important, and in another sense I discriminate some as sillier than others, and so deserving of less attention — like my made up god tries to show.

    That’s a personal judgment. For example, I think the story of the Big Bang is deserving of more time than creation stories— even though it is a kind of creation story itself. I do think there’s something to naturalism, in other words, that is indeed unique and special.

    So this can be seen as my religion, when put like that. But then again, I also believe in something “bigger” than nature. I prefer terms like “such-ness” over God or Brahman, but it’s still something not within the purview of science (which I see as the philosophy of nature; assuming naturalism by default).

    Anyway— I see the problem now, and it’s that I’m presupposing that there is no such thing as Christian philosophy, and I assume most others here agree with that. Turns out that’s not the case. So my advice is bound to fall flat, except for a few outliers.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    I don't feel persecuted at all, as it happens, at least, not by you. — unenlightened

    Glad to hear it.

    then who are you addressing, and what are you saying for them not to do? — unenlightened

    Not to treat it as special or requiring special attention, philosophically. I think we do that subconsciously — I’ve been guilty of it too. It’s why I invoked ethnocentrism, which I think is a related phenomena.

    I’m not saying don’t read the Bible, or deprive yourself of the wisdom of Christianity, etc.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    ↪unenlightened


    Your entire post is a strawman. But you’re free to feel persecuted if you wish.
  • What do we know absolutely?
    ↪Cidat


    There are no absolutes; I’m absolutely certain of it. :wink:
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    If a believer thought their religion was just a bunch of stories they wouldnt be a believer. — DingoJones

    It’s rare perhaps, but not as rare as you’d think. Tradition and identity go a long way. What’s so great about belief?

    Anyway— I’m surprised you didn’t ask whether it’s impossible to be a believer and do philosophy; i.e., whether a Christian philosophy is possible. I’d have answered in the negative.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    For many, abstract thinking is toil; for me, on good days, it is feast and frenzy. Abstract thinking a feast? The highest form of human existence? … The feast implies: pride, exuberance, frivolity; mockery of all earnestness and respectability; a divine affirmation of oneself, out of animal plenitude and perfection—all obviously states to which the Christian may not honestly say Yes. The feast is paganism par excellence. For that reason, we might add that thinking never takes place in Christianity. That is to say, there is no Christian philosophy. There is no true philosophy that could be determined anywhere else than from within itself.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    I don't expect an idealist to treat idealism the same as any other ontology and I don't expect a Muslim to treat Islam like any other religion. — Count Timothy von Icarus

    Well I consider this a kind of dogmatism, and especially so if it’s simply due to the happenstance of upbringing.

    Why shouldn’t we treat idealism as any other ontology? At some point we should, no? Maybe we’re convinced by it and grant it special importance, but that’s further down the road — and definitively not simply because it was the ideology of our family.

    By my conception of philosophy, we should be free to question everything. If we aren’t willing to, that’s fine— but then whatever else this activity may be, it isn’t philosophy.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    You were taught these stories as a child. Anyone who thinks them through, if they’re strong enough, will just let them go as cultural fairytales — on par with Santa Klaus and caring about the National Football League.

    IDK, this seems to imply that the religious are simply weak minded simpletons, unable to let go of past conditioning.     — Count Timothy von Icarus

    I see that now. I didn’t mean that exactly— by “strong enough” I’m referring to how difficult it is to make that transition. It’s extremely hard. But I’m aiming this at those who already have done so, or at least are close to doing so. I’ve met people who describe themselves as Christian who even agree with Nietzsche’s characterization!

    But no, to be clear: I don’t consider Christian people — or Muslim people, or Hindu people, or followers of Shinto, etc —to be simpleminded or weak minded on account that they don’t share my view of their religions as cultural phenomena (on par with languages or music) and not deserving of any special attention. To them I assume it’s very special indeed.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    So what’s your point? All you have done is petition believers to lay down delusions they do not believe they possess. — DingoJones

    As the disclaimer notes, I’m not aiming this at believers. I’m aiming this at those who are interested in questioning; in philosophy. That can be anyone— Christian or non-Christian, Hindu or non-Hindu. Those who recognize whatever religion they happen to be brought up in as one of many stories.

    Given this situation, I would argue it’s just as much a waste of time to give special attention to Shiva (because one happened to be raised in India) or God (because one happened to be raised in the West) as it is to Xhandizi. It’s all perhaps interesting in an anthropological sense— but we needn’t give it extra weight or seriousness based on cultural familiarity. I see it done often — especially by atheists, in fact. So my advice is based on personal feeling, of course — but I think it’s potentially useful. Just let it go. I speak from experience in fact.

    As for those who really do believe, and don’t view Christianity (or pick a religion) as just one of others, but assign it extra importance because it’s their faith— well, let them be happy with that. It’s not my business to tell people what to believe or to upbraid them for not being secular enough or whatever. Especially if they’re kind and moral people, of which I know many. My advice doesn’t even apply to them.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    What kind of argument is that? You're basically saying, "I don't agree with you so I'm right and you're wrong. That's not an argument, and it's not doing philosophy. — Sam26

    No, I’m not saying I’m right. I’m saying I have a different definition of philosophy. I said that before, too. Yours is fine— but that’s not what I’m meaning when I use the term.
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    Your question was sloppily phrased.
    I try not to make assumptions about what other people mean.     — DingoJones

    Yep— I should have specified. I was in part building off of an earlier response that didn’t involve you, so you had no way of knowing.

    “Why or why not should the above be taken seriously, philosophically speaking? Let’s assume the imagined interlocutor can give loads of delusional reasons and evidence and arguments.“ — DingoJones

    Well, kind of. My point is that everyone has arguments and reasons, and I added that because in another discussion it didn’t seem obvious. No one will come right out and say they have no reasons, nor will they say they’re delusional. It’s up to us to figure that out.

    With that being said, the question stands— is this easier to ignore than other claims? I say it is for a simple enough reason: it’s completely made up by me. I think you must agree with this somehow. You wouldn’t really waste time on any of my questions, because it’s just fabricated nonsense. Right?

    ↪Tom Storm


    Yes indeed!
  • God & Christianity Aren’t Special
    You're saying that such questions are a waste of time for you... and only you? — creativesoul

    Nope. I feel they’re a waste of time for others too. As I think was clear.

    What a load of bullshit! — creativesoul

    Bye.

    Cool. I agree. Thanks for indulging me. — Tom Storm

    Any time.

    ↪Janus


    :up:
Home » Mikie