Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. I'm not sure I understand this.

I'm not sure I understand this.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
htmlcomquestion
58 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R RichardM1

    Oakman wrote:

    So said Stalin, and Mao, and all the arch criminals who ever murdered thousands of their own countrymen.

    John, you are off by anywhere from 10^4 to 10^5. :sigh:

    Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.

    O Offline
    O Offline
    Oakman
    wrote on last edited by
    #48

    RichardM1 wrote:

    John, you are off by anywhere from 10^4 to 10^5.

    Could be. I have made mistakes before. Last time, I was about 12. . .

    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • R Rob Graham

      Any tax, in any amount aimed specifically at a given group of people in a way that is tantamount to declaring them guilty of a crime without benefit of a trail would be a bill of attainder. Bills of attainder are forbidden by Article I, section 9, clause 3 of the United States Constitution. There is nearly no chance that such a tax would fail to reach the federal courts and be reversed there. It might be done to create theatre for the masses, but I would hate to read the opinion (or be the target of the opprobium) that such would likely garner from the court.

      O Offline
      O Offline
      Oakman
      wrote on last edited by
      #49

      Rob Graham wrote:

      There is nearly no chance that such a tax would fail to reach the federal courts and be reversed there

      Which still would accomplish every purpose the Congress and Obama would have in creating such a law. As you say, "theatre for the masses." Perhaps for a curtain call, they could all stand on the floor of the House and chant "We feel your pain!" before going off into their limos to their private dining clubs and where they could congratulate themselves on having earned their new and higher salaries.

      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

      R 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Stan Shannon

        Rob Graham wrote:

        Why are Democrats so quick to organize circular firing squads. It does not serve the Obama administration to alienate their own in congress. I doubt that Dodd sees it as "nothing personal", or will soon forget it.

        It is my plan working itself out to perfection. With the republicans keeping themselves out of the picture as much as they possibly can, democrats have no one left to demonize other than one another. Political parties with no viable opposition will always splinter into factions. Its beautiful.

        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

        O Offline
        O Offline
        Oakman
        wrote on last edited by
        #50

        Stan Shannon wrote:

        It is my plan

        Stan, you don't have a plan. You have no power so you have no plan. You're not unique in this. I would guess that most or all of us have not real ability to affect what happens politically. If we did, we'd be out doing it, not chit-chatting in the Back Room.

        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

        S 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • S Stan Shannon

          Christian Graus wrote:

          Why do you keep advocating it then ?

          Because the only alternative is collectivism, socialism, fascism and finally communism. The centralization of power ultimately cannot be controlled, democracy or no democracy. That is why I believe the only thing that will save human civilization now is a complete collapse of the entire economic system so that it can be rebuilt from the ground up. People of faith and integrity will be the only ones capable of surviving such a calamity and they will be the ones who will inherit the future.

          Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #51

          Stan Shannon wrote:

          I believe the only thing that will save human civilization now is a complete collapse of the entire economic system

          With a total collapse of economics systems, won't save humans, it will sign their death warrant. By the very definition of "complete collapse" means that monies will no longer flow anywhere. This means that shops and supermarkets will not function. Middle-men and wholesalers will not function. Farms will not function and livestock will need to be destroyed as feed is unavailable, produce in the ground will rot. Utilities such as power and mains water will not work therefore that which depends on water and power, such as transportation systems, will not function. Civilization will stop dead in its tracks. Hunger and thirst will be insurmountable. Those fortunate enough to have gardens and seed stocks might plant/sow but it takes such time and water for them to mature to edible standard, the family may have starved by then yet if mains water is not functioning, then your life expectancy is measured in days (hours if it is very hot summery weather) as thirst overcomes all. We as a race have become far too dependent on the goodwill of others. Remove this humanity of goodwill and what you have left is a lack of individual and local-collective knowledge, a lack of experience, a lack of basic resources and a crisis that self-sufficiency would not be able to address.

          Stan Shannon wrote:

          collectivism, socialism, fascism and finally communism

          They have economic systems as well. They may not exactly function in the same way as capitalism does, but they are also users of economic systems nonetheless.

          Stan Shannon wrote:

          People of faith and integrity

          Will also perish alongside ordinary folk. The future will not be human, and our passing will not be noticed by anyone or anything.

          S 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            IlĂ­on wrote:

            But we don't, because far too many of us have been bought-out.

            And far too many of the electorate are stupid. Voting for the party, not the person. I have voted for an intelligent, competent, incumbent, rather than my preferred 'brand'. Voting a party out, without considering what they are voting in. Every bloody election: "Well, they can't be much worse than this lot."

            Bob Emmett

            R Offline
            R Offline
            Rob Graham
            wrote on last edited by
            #52

            Bob Emmett wrote:

            Voting a party out, without considering what they are voting in. Every bloody election: "Well, they can't be much worse than this lot."

            Yeah, I prefer the attitude that was prevalent in Louisiana when I lived there: "better the thieves you know than the ones you don't...".

            L 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • O Oakman

              Rob Graham wrote:

              There is nearly no chance that such a tax would fail to reach the federal courts and be reversed there

              Which still would accomplish every purpose the Congress and Obama would have in creating such a law. As you say, "theatre for the masses." Perhaps for a curtain call, they could all stand on the floor of the House and chant "We feel your pain!" before going off into their limos to their private dining clubs and where they could congratulate themselves on having earned their new and higher salaries.

              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

              R Offline
              R Offline
              Rob Graham
              wrote on last edited by
              #53

              That's why I added the closing sentence. Politicians love theater, even when it is stupid, bad theater. It would however, likely generate a court opinion that would be long remembered. Scalia has an acid wit.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • O Oakman

                Stan Shannon wrote:

                It is my plan

                Stan, you don't have a plan. You have no power so you have no plan. You're not unique in this. I would guess that most or all of us have not real ability to affect what happens politically. If we did, we'd be out doing it, not chit-chatting in the Back Room.

                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                S Offline
                S Offline
                Stan Shannon
                wrote on last edited by
                #54

                No, really. I'm like the George Soros of Middletown. Only not as rich or good looking...

                Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                O 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • R Rob Graham

                  Bob Emmett wrote:

                  Voting a party out, without considering what they are voting in. Every bloody election: "Well, they can't be much worse than this lot."

                  Yeah, I prefer the attitude that was prevalent in Louisiana when I lived there: "better the thieves you know than the ones you don't...".

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Lost User
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #55

                  My Granny always voted for the party led by a 'gentleman'. She didn't vote after 1963 (not even for Thatcher - she wasn't a 'lady').

                  Bob Emmett

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Stan Shannon

                    No, really. I'm like the George Soros of Middletown. Only not as rich or good looking...

                    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                    O Offline
                    O Offline
                    Oakman
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #56

                    Stan Shannon wrote:

                    I'm like the George Soros of Middletown. Only not as rich or good looking

                    :thumbsup::thumbsup:

                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Lost User

                      Stan Shannon wrote:

                      I believe the only thing that will save human civilization now is a complete collapse of the entire economic system

                      With a total collapse of economics systems, won't save humans, it will sign their death warrant. By the very definition of "complete collapse" means that monies will no longer flow anywhere. This means that shops and supermarkets will not function. Middle-men and wholesalers will not function. Farms will not function and livestock will need to be destroyed as feed is unavailable, produce in the ground will rot. Utilities such as power and mains water will not work therefore that which depends on water and power, such as transportation systems, will not function. Civilization will stop dead in its tracks. Hunger and thirst will be insurmountable. Those fortunate enough to have gardens and seed stocks might plant/sow but it takes such time and water for them to mature to edible standard, the family may have starved by then yet if mains water is not functioning, then your life expectancy is measured in days (hours if it is very hot summery weather) as thirst overcomes all. We as a race have become far too dependent on the goodwill of others. Remove this humanity of goodwill and what you have left is a lack of individual and local-collective knowledge, a lack of experience, a lack of basic resources and a crisis that self-sufficiency would not be able to address.

                      Stan Shannon wrote:

                      collectivism, socialism, fascism and finally communism

                      They have economic systems as well. They may not exactly function in the same way as capitalism does, but they are also users of economic systems nonetheless.

                      Stan Shannon wrote:

                      People of faith and integrity

                      Will also perish alongside ordinary folk. The future will not be human, and our passing will not be noticed by anyone or anything.

                      S Offline
                      S Offline
                      Stan Shannon
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #57

                      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                      With a total collapse of economics systems, won't save humans, it will sign their death war...

                      Maybe, maybe not. It still needs to happen. The direction we are headed is the worse possible scenario for the human race. Better to die with a bang than a collectivist whimper.

                      Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                      Will also perish alongside ordinary folk. The future will not be human, and our passing will not be noticed by anyone or anything.

                      They will be less likely to. If anyone survives it will be the people with strong traditional values. Thats why we evolved the ability to have strong traditional values - survival.

                      Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                      L 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • S Stan Shannon

                        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                        With a total collapse of economics systems, won't save humans, it will sign their death war...

                        Maybe, maybe not. It still needs to happen. The direction we are headed is the worse possible scenario for the human race. Better to die with a bang than a collectivist whimper.

                        Richard A. Abbott wrote:

                        Will also perish alongside ordinary folk. The future will not be human, and our passing will not be noticed by anyone or anything.

                        They will be less likely to. If anyone survives it will be the people with strong traditional values. Thats why we evolved the ability to have strong traditional values - survival.

                        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #58

                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                        Better to die with a bang

                        There certainly are more than enough tensions around the globe that are not economic in nature, what with Russia wanting to re-arm and so forth. But in terms of economics, there are plenty still yet to unwind such as those ever so secretive 144A equity securities and the damning UCLA Law Review Vol 56 p 409 of 2008 [^] whole report via the download link.

                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                        survival

                        Of the fittest - perhaps - but not necessarily in large towns and cities where brutality of gangland might temporarily exist.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups