Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

First Ukraine, could the U.S. be next

Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

29 Jul 2014, 1:17 pm

Humanaut wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
...the world is "equalizing", and wealth is transferring to Asia. Americans are getting poorer, and Asian people getting wealthier, while ~750 million Chinese people have been lifted out of extreme poverty in the last 20 years.

The interesting lesson is that this is not an effect of wealth redistribution, but increased economic freedom in Asia followed by more trade between what is traditionally thought of as a beacon of capitalism, and a communist dictatorship.


^This.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

29 Jul 2014, 1:20 pm

sly279 wrote:
as for the BLM
saying if you don't give us what we want we'll come in there and take it with force. that seems like a threat to me.


The BLM wasn't saying "give us what we want or we'll take it," they were saying "give us what you are obligated to pay under federal law and have been ordered to pay by multiple court decisions or we will seize assets in a legally defined manner."


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

29 Jul 2014, 7:43 pm

sonofghandi wrote:
sly279 wrote:
as for the BLM
saying if you don't give us what we want we'll come in there and take it with force. that seems like a threat to me.


The BLM wasn't saying "give us what we want or we'll take it," they were saying "give us what you are obligated to pay under federal law and have been ordered to pay by multiple court decisions or we will seize assets in a legally defined manner."


many say the irs has no legal right under law to seize assets. also what if the people refuse then the blm would shoot them.
the whole thing is stupid. the lands should be returned to Nevada. and apparently he is fine with paying Nevada for use of Nevada's land.

it's easy to say its not me so its ok, but what happens when it's you. the feds are more interested in what is under the land and how it might bring money to them rather then continued ranching. there's better ways to get money then rounding up and mass killing cattle that could feed people. they could have seized his bank account money.



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

30 Jul 2014, 12:04 pm

sly279 wrote:
many say the irs has no legal right under law to seize assets. also what if the people refuse then the blm would shoot them.
the whole thing is stupid. the lands should be returned to Nevada. and apparently he is fine with paying Nevada for use of Nevada's land.


And many say income tax is illegal. It isn't. Nor is asset seizure.

And the land belonged to the federal government before Nevada was even a state, so that garbage just doesn't wash.

And the BLM would not shoot people for resisting an asset seizure, unless it was in a situation where it would be deemed self defense. Hence the reason there was a stand-off in the first place.

Thinking the BLM showed up to shoot people is just plain paranoid delusion.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche