Total posts: 2,472
Posted in:
I can see the argument. I'd say that DART is run by decent monarchs and I would only improve their moderating style slightly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
if your claim is that they do happen to atheists, where are the examples?
I don't know every atheist's life. They probably would say that rather than it being a miracle, they would call it statistically rare. I'm unsure if miracles exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
do you believe in God or the afterlife? why or why not?
Yes, although I'm prone to switching frequently. This is because our solar system is relatively flat, as with every other solar system. I think its by design.
what do you think of near death experiences?
I've had one. I think God saved me from one.
do you believe in miracles? why or why not?
I think miracles are outliers in the nature of statistics.
what do you think of Christianity?
I fear God and hate Catholicism; too many priests that rape kids.
Created:
Posted in:
I only block people that block me first. This only happened once.
Created:
-->
@DebateArt.com
What can we spend the coins on?
Created:
Posted in:
I think Pinkfreud had a personality similar to me but little cookie has a personality similar to supadudz.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
I thought you meant that we would pick rock and roll songs that we liked.
Created:
Posted in:
Some black people made good famous rap, and they got rewarded for it with ad revenue. That's capitalism.
Created:
Posted in:
If BLM believes the government is being tyrannical to African Americans, they should be pro 2nd amendment so they are more consistent. They won't do that though, because they are hijacked by democrats.
Created:
Posted in:
Stereotype me. I know you don't like me, but still.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I guess the problem I have with this is that what if later on we found out they were innocent but I'm sure the blood donation is not going to kill the person.
If they are innocent, they get freed and paid for the blood we took from them thinking they were guilty. I'd say $100/day in jail and $2000/pint of blood is a fair reward for the falsely accused once they are proven innocent.
but I'm sure the blood donation is not going to kill the person.
Blood donation doesn't kill you.
Another problem I found is that giving a certain date instead of whenever people need blood limits its effectiveness.
My plan is the prisons generate the blood and sell it to whichever hospital needs the blood. If a hospital needs the blood, they contact a prison so the prison can sell them the blood. Blood can be stored for quite some time, although I forgot how long.
You've neglected to mention in your last response that this would be a sort of filling a gap in universal healthcare but it won't.
It would save a comparable amount of lives to UHC, but they would be different people's lives. Still, 60,000 lives saved per year by forcing bad felons to give blood every 2 months. If you need blood to survive in the US, your basically saved under this model.
Scrap the value of the human life part I was talking about. I didn't know you were talking about people who were sentenced for life in prison.
Ordinary people wouldn't have to give blood unless they want to. It would only be murderers and rapists that would have to do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Who?
The Dynamic Squid.
How many politicians are support this?
I think every politician who supports the death penalty right now, once they hear this idea, they would support this idea instead.
I'm guessing you have no source to provide this or your saying since giving blood save lives the other lives don't matter because of utilitarianism
The only life that we would be infringing upon are the lives of rapists and murderers, and it's not much either; they just give blood every 2 months in addition to life in jail.
not to mention you are reducing the value of a human life making dependent on how many are alike that person
Can you rephrase this part since it doesn't make sense?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Hasn't literally everyone on this site disagreed with you on your way of removing the debt?
Not true. Someone called it genius.
Do you have an example?
Make them give blood every 2 months to save about as many people as UHC would without modifying the economy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Like how to eliminate the debt and how to punish murderers and rapists in a utilitarian way that saves more people than UHC.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
im doing great now with my new bf
I'm not against homosexuality for other people, but be careful.
Created:
Posted in:
He is a very powerful persuader who actually comes up with arguments of his own accord and assimilation of facts.
I noticed the same thing in myself.
This both makes him a good liar and a good spreader of truth, that part is up to him.
I don't lie, but I try and spread ideas that I think are good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Inflation doesn't work like that. Governments inflate intentionally to get out of debt sometime (that's what happened in interwar Germany), it doesn't just happen against your will. Japan, for example, has been trying to raise their inflation rate for ages while at the same time being one of the most indebted countries in the world, and hasn't had a huge amount of success. The idea that debt=inflation has long been discredited.
I don't advocate for inflation.
Your plan is also completely insane. Completely open borders, moving the tax burden to sales tax, and an end to welfare would lead to race/class riots and the collapse of civil order.
How so?
A cut of that level in military spending would render the US geopolitically insolvent.
Not true. With the massive increase in GDP, we can spend 1% of our GDP on the military and it would still have an increase in overall spending by about $100 billion.
And less births are the last thing that a country with a rapidly inverting population pyramid needs.
I don't advocate less births. Births should be up to the individual to decide how many they want.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
the punishment needs to be strong enough that people wouldn't want it to happen to them. (like a few years in jail). But making punishments more and more severe beyond that are counter productive.
So your saying the punishment for murder should only be a few years in jail?
It is far more effective to go after the underlying reasons the crimes were committed, like fighting poverty and providing better education.
Poverty would barely exist if it wasn't for Lyndon B Johnson's war on poverty, which caused people to become dependent on the government. It would be like launching a war on abortion, and the abortion rate stagnating after it was launched after falling for decades. If that's the case, then the war on abortion would have to be overturned, just like what the war on poverty should be to reduce poverty since it failed its only goal.
They are protected by a corrupt system. I haven't seen anything in your proposal that addresses that.
I would want rich rapists charged with rape and put on trial for it and each side has comparably skilled and paid lawyers to make it fair.
ok. so you are now having the government murdering people and chopping them into parts for your own benefit.
Murderers and rapists don't deserve human rights. They denied their victims human rights, they deserve the same treatment.
That is precisely the logic used by slavers, nazi's etc.
They sorted people based off of race or religion, things that who cares if your black and/or jewish. Being a rapist or a murderer are like the worst things you can do in society. They therefore deserve to be punished more.
there is a HUGE difference between justice and farming humans for meat.
I don't want them farmed for meat; that would be inefficient. Certain crimes don't deserve the chance to be rehabbed. Drug use does, robbery does. But there is no excuse to murder and rape.
ok, you are now moving beyond the who "public good" aspect of the evil and want to directly profit off of chopping human beings into spare parts. how are you not seeing the cartoonishly evil aspects of this plan?
Because ... it saves innocent people.
Why does the left advocate for sympathizing and rehabilitating criminals so much?because they are humans.
So what?
the US has highest imprisoned population per capita in the world by a sizable margin
This is because of the drug war, which too has failed. I want the drug war to end. But rapists and murderers don't deserve freedom and they are rare enough to make this possible.
if you think that upholding human rights is a "bleeding heart", then you clearly do not give a shit if people have human rights.
I don't want rapists and murderers to have human rights.
The left sympathizes with human beings more than a clump of cells (which is not a human being).
Your technically a clump of cells too. What separates a human from a cancer cell is if the cells are specialized. A fetus has their cells specialized 6 weeks into the pregnancy, and the left wants to legalize the killing of the fetus up until 20 weeks in. In Canada, it's legal up until the moment of birth to do this, when the kid can feel pain. An innocent fetus with specialized cells has more value than a rapist.
The left cares about the poor.
Then the WoP would have been overturned decades ago.
and replaced it with what?
A policy I call, "Find and grind" meaning we show low income people where they can get good jobs that only require a high school degree, we loosen the regulations on businesses so poor people have more incentive to start a small business that hopefully grows and hires more good paying jobs, and poverty is virtually gone in less than a decade.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
Your personality seemed very different from Pink Freud's. It's a surprise to me.
How many palms do you have as an Eagle Scout?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
If our debt becomes too big, then countries won't trust us with the USD since we would inflate it a lot. Lets eliminate the debt, since under my tax model, that's plausible. I had to do some tweaking of it, but it looks alright now.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
the evidence suggests that being "tough on crime" is ineffective anyway.
If there is no punishment for a crime, then it is done very frequently. Don't mean to straw man you, but your going to have to draw a line eventually as to how harshly to punish murderers and rapists.
rich rapists are supposed to be punished now, usually they aren't. So massively increasing how badly you treat people who actually get convicted has no effect on rich people because they don't usually get charged, let alone convicted.
So then charge the rich rapists.
chopping someone up into parts because you don't see them as having any value. That is straight up evil
Why? They're dead when its being done to them.
They thought the jews had no value and were detrimental to society, so it was perfectly fine to run experiments on them, work them to death etc.
There is a moral difference between being Jewish and being a murderer or rapist.
Making ourselves into inhuman monsters doesn't help women.
The women want justice for the rapes done to them. If we take the rapist's blood, we can sell it to other domestic or foreign hospitals, get some money or assets for the blood we sold, if necessary convert that to cash by selling it to another company, and with that cash, partially fund a UBI for rape victims, paid for by the rapist's blood. This also includes the murderers of George Floyd.
I mean, i know many republicans are heartless, money driven assholes.
Why does the left advocate for sympathizing and rehabilitating criminals so much? It seems though as if they have a bleeding heart for everyone, including literal killers and rapists, while pretending to be pro women at the same time because they believe in killing unwanted unborn babies. The left sympathizes with rapists more than they do with the unborn, even though unlike the rapist, the unborn is not a felon.
This is slightly off topic, but the left cares about the poor votes, not the poor folks. If they cared about poor people, they would have overturned the socialist war on poverty a long time ago since it failed its only goal; to get people out of poverty. The left however has a fetish for keeping people dependent on the government, so they want people to stay poor so they can vote for democrats.
Created:
-->
@Imabench
It costs a fuckton of money to keep them in jail for life whereas streamlining the death penalty process and how that is carried out could be made way cheaper
The death penalty is more expensive because of all the trials that take place.
Some prisoners could carry blood diseases or genetic abnormalities such as having the XYY chromosome package that makes them more aggressive that wouldnt be good for casual use among civilians
If they have XYY, this shouldn't be a too big of a deal. Males born with XYY tend to be normal, so it's not a violent genetic trait(https://www.google.com/search?q=XYY&oq=XYY&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l7.988j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8).
There's the sticky civil rights issue of whether or not the government could even do such a thing but the death penalty has in most part been cleared in the country
If the government has the power to take your life without your consent, the government should have the power to take blood from prisoners every 2 months. Taking blood is a less harsh sentence than the death penalty.
There are times where blood donation supply isnt in a terrible state/shortage
Then we store the blood until there is a shortage or send it somewhere to where it could be of good use to somebody, saving their life. Or we sell it overseas.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I have a liberal friend who defends the burning of a city down over 1 dead guy. Liberals overreact so much. It sucks that they run the urban cities.
Created:
-->
@Imabench
What's wrong with a utilitarian approach; forcing these convicts to give blood every 2 months to save more live in addition to life in jail?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I do not accept that people ever give up their human rights under any circumstances. Once you accept that it is alright to farm people for meat because they are bad, how bad their have to be to cross that line is now a very dangerous point.
Its not and you can say the same thing with being less tough on crime. If we rahab serious felons, how long would it take before they only get a slap on the wrist for a murder or rape and commit the crime again?
Historically the law has been used by the rich to punish the poor and protect their own power
Rich rapists would get punished the same way a poor rapist would under my rules.
You want to farm people for meat.... that is some cartoony levels of evil. I don't know what else to call it.
Saving people's lives by using rapist's and murderer's blood is not evil. It's utilitarian.
Also, it's not very pro women to sympathize with rapists.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
lol so in a society where people are already trying to turn the prison system into a profit making endeavor so they can get rich off the suffering of others, you want to literally harvest people for their blood and meat.
I'm on the fence about private prisons, but they're murderers and rapists that we're talking about. Given how much the left respects women, they ought to respect them by punishing the rapists pretty harshly.
I mean, i know many republicans are heartless, money driven assholes. But you have just transitioned to fictional super villain levels of evil.
Poor conduct.
Created:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Also anyone who dies in prison should be an automatic organ donor. (again provided they aren't diseased etc)
I agree.
HIV rates in prisons are quite high, probably hepatitis etc as well
Assuming the rapists/murderers didn't have HIV or any other STD.
If your a rapist or murderer, you don't deserve freedom.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
If someone wants to use the forums for debating, its their choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
I think I act like a stoner even though I don't use weed. Joe's kindof libertarian though.
Created:
I mean, it would save more people than medicare for all and the rights of a murderer or rapist in this instance shouldn't matter. I doubt I will be around too frequently since its hard to be on DART, but what are the thoughts around this idea? Seems like a pretty good idea to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Hyades
The principle on which the calculation is based is simply wrong, yet I still think it is worthwhile to point out that while an increase in wages has been observed in recent years in the US, the Covid-19 situation is likely to profoundly alter last years economic trends.
Covid 19 will leave its mark, but in my plan to get us out of debt, I also assumed that the US debt was $27 Trillion (about $2 trillion ahead of what it is now) and I planned my idea off of eliminating that bigger debt, so that ought to even things out.
I will say what I understood of each spreadsheet before commenting, I won't cover them all, though.
K
While I have seen many ways to calculate GDP, I must say doing so by adding healthcare bonus to median salary (I believe it is median) is a novelty to me.
If we have medicare for all, employers that previously had to pay for healthcare just give it to their employees in cash. This is what causes the salary increase.
the US government revenue in 2019 being $3.5 trillion according to the Congressional Budget Office's Summary for Fiscal Year 2019.
This was without open borders and a practical ban on immigration. Open borders would cause our GDP to skyrocket and with that, our tax revenue would also skyrocket.
Another important point is that it is assumed the US stock market will triple because of an increase in corporate profits
It would triple because the corporations have triple the labor with open borders, and triple the customers, triple the GDP. Open borders are an economic blessing.
a ~700 million influx would probably yield apocalyptic economic results on the short and mid runs.
How so?
The author assumes a constant GDP increase that, even if it were true on average, is irrelevant since it is being ignorant of economic cycles and brutal shifts in trends caused by external events.
I do assume some stuff, but if there is a future recession, the plan gets tweaked as necessary.
A sales tax for example (as you propose it) is a non-discriminatory flat tax
The poor spend more on goods, but the rich spend more on investments, so things even out.
A tax on "stock revenue" can discourage investing as well and even lead corporations to move financial operations elsewhere (Luxembourg attracting a large number of European investment funds is an example, even though they do have taxation they offer an overall easier framework than other countries)
It's hard to discourage investing. An income tax discourages income production. But with investing, since it's easy money, you'll have a pretty hard time discouraging investing. It's much easier to discourage making large amounts of income; just tax it. It's why I want to abolish the income tax and replace it with a sales tax and a capitol gains tax.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Sorry for not responding sooner. AP STATS got me busy.
If I'm not mistaken, your 2020 budget proposes a nine trillion dollar increase in the Federal Budget, where 43% (5.4 Trillion) will be appropriated to Medicare 4 All. How is that not an increase in spending?
It's more now. This money is obtained by taxing the population more efficiently. Abolishing the income ta and replacing it with a sales tax and a capitol gains tax produce way more cash than an income tax because it's harder to dodge a national sales tax than it is to dodge the income tax.
What about the administrative and utilization costs?
They are covered in the government section of this budget.
What if they refuse?
Why would they refuse? The jobs pay much better salaries and if we ban welfare, people would have to pick their favorite job from the list, which shouldn't be hard since their alternative is a lower paying McDonalds job.
What if they don't have the skills?
They get the skills. Training programs are cheaper and easier than college is.
Why does a tripling in the population necessarily merit a tripling in energy demanded?
Because people use electricity at comparable rates. Triple the population means triple the energy demand, so triple the number of jobs will be avaliable.
Paying or giving "tax breaks" to employers for taking on low-skilled homeless labor as opposed to high-skilled non-homeless labor.
The employer would want to hire both people because it expands their business more if they have the funds for expansion.
Where do you account for Utilities? Clothing? Cell phones? Television? Personal computers? Car payments? Public Transportation? What about the cost of living by State?
All of that is in the other section.
Will you pay for classes that teach them about saving? Furthermore, what the specific effect of a 10% savings rate in your plan?
The business that the poor person selects would because that business would need the labor to expand, so educating the poor on how to get acclimated to the workforce is an investement for the buisiness.
And how much of the poor do you expect will purchase stock?
I expect them all to once they no longer become poor with their better salaries that they would get by checking out the sheet below (I'm wanting to send this to my representative to see what she thinks, so it's why I condensed everything):
They do not work on commission.
The homeless liberators could work on commission. Every homeless person they liberate from poverty by showing them how to get out of it by checking out the sheet I made, the liberator can get a reward for it. I'd say $10 per homeless person. That means if a liberator shows 10 homeless the sheet per day, then that's their daily salary, and that seems to be a fair day's work for the liberators.
There are 328 million people in the U.S.209 million constitute the adult population.61% of them are employed which amounts to 127.5 million people.75% of them pay taxes which amounts to 95.6 million.
Under my model, anyone who buys anything for any reason would be paying a sales tax on what they buy.
But you haven't liberated them from poverty in a single day. You merely set them up.
Yea, but in time, those homeless people would liberate themselves out of poverty by learning about their job and helping themselves.
You're assuming an influx of labor supply that would easily be met by a proportional increase in labor demanded.
It would. Just as the US population goes up, but unemployment doesn't go up with it on a linear level because jobs get created, in addition to being workers, immigrants are also consumers. When you triple the workforce, you also triple the consumer base, triple the jobs, and tripe the economy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Doesn't America have militias too?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I don't think that is accurate. If they can invade places, so can the US.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
So what? Let Iran manage their government the way they want. Anyone who doesn't like it is free to move to a place like the US.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
I meant I was playing Devil's advocate on this forum. On most forums, I state what I believe in for that moment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I don't think Iran is a big threat to American freedom. They want the right to manage their own state and that's all. Lets give Iran states rights.
Created:
Posted in:
I changed my mind on this topic. I'd rather bribe planned parenthood with contraception money so they can make better contraception and then abortions will hopefully become more rare than murder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
I'm playing Devil's advocate. If I bring up a topic, and there are like 15 posts on my notifications, I'm not responding to all that.
Created:
Posted in:
Lets pull out of Israel completely. They don't benefit us in any way that I know of.
Created: