Quote from felixblue

Absolutely. The poor have never been popular which is why the state likes to keep them at that level as a way of persuading everyone to run faster on the treadmill.. What are they running towards? What are they powering? I think so many folks are motivated by escaping from something they fear more than towards something they desire. That is what so many rich people say anyway, it is mainly insecurity that drives them to gain wealth, as if security can be bought so easily..

If slavery was legal, at least a person would know where they stood in society.

Slavery has been perfected to such a level that now folks do not even realise they are slaves.. They actually can do more work when they are under the delusion that they are free, and the masters get to do less..

Buy your own fucking accomadation and food and clothing now, you are free.. Work for it!

Quote from Garak

I knew that would be your defense. Poor people wouldn't be there anyway, in which case, what if everyone buys insurance? Wouldn't there be a need to have enough rescue boats for everyone? Why not just make that standard or is it going to be first come first serve on the insurance?

Perhaps you haven't read all of my comments on this thread yet. To reiterate my main points: 1) It's ridiculous that ships in this day and age don't have the means to rescue everyone when they sink, and 2) If, for whatever reason, ships are not equipped with life boats for everyone, then there should be some means of deciding who gets rescued and who doesn't other than genetalia and age. Allowing people to chose beforehand to purchase a spot on a life boat is much better than having everyone pay the same far within his own cabit status only find out that he and his penis must literally sink or swim. If you want to turn this into a rich vs. poor debate, then perhaps we can move that discussion to anothe thread.

Added after 5 minutes:

Quote from Garak

It's the poor who can't afford treatment in the US Healthcare system. It's the poor who sign up for the military and go to war. I guess we may as well make it work the same way for sinking ships. Not that I agree with it but that's what it comes down to anyway, lower decks and all that.

You are conflating so many different ideas into one that it's quite confusing. I don't begrudge the rich just because I haven't got much. If someone becomes rich through hard work, inheritance, or creativity, then good for him. Enjoy! It's better than being a dishonest poor man. There's no correlation between character and wealth. All the poor people that expect the rich to pay for their health care, etc. (through taxation, i.e. government agents redistributing wealth at the point of a gun) are thieves.

This thread has gone from brain washing to boats. What's next? The best method of scrubbing decks?

Quote from Dylan MacVillain

Perhaps you haven't read all of my comments on this thread yet. To reiterate my main points: 1) It's ridiculous that ships in this day and age don't have the means to rescue everyone when they sink, and 2) If, for whatever reason, ships are not equipped with life boats for everyone, then there should be some means of deciding who gets rescued and who doesn't other than genetalia and age. Allowing people to chose beforehand to purchase a spot on a life boat is much better than having everyone pay the same far within his own cabit status only find out that he and his penis must literally sink or swim. If you want to turn this into a rich vs. poor debate, then perhaps we can move that discussion to anothe thread.

Added after 5 minutes:



You are conflating so many different ideas into one that it's quite confusing. I don't begrudge the rich just because I haven't got much. If someone becomes rich through hard work, inheritance, or creativity, then good for him. Enjoy! It's better than being a dishonest poor man. There's no correlation between character and wealth. All the poor people that expect the rich to pay for their health care, etc. (through taxation, i.e. government agents redistributing wealth at the point of a gun) are thieves.

Are the poor who expect equal police protection also thieves?

Quote from FloatyBoaty

This thread has gone from brain washing to boats. What's next? The best method of scrubbing decks?

I think that the poor should be conscripted into scrubbing decks and fetching iced tea for the rich as a way out of military conscription. And of course, if the ship goes down, they should then have to escort their masters to the life boats afters securing life vests on them.

Quote from Dylan MacVillain

Well, given that nature has afforded women with built-in flotation devices both front and rear, they are more suited to not drowning than men and children and therefore should demonstrate their superiority by insisting on being rescued last.

The floatation devices won't work if those women are anorexic....

Quote from Dylan MacVillain

Anyone who gets on a vessel that does not supply enough rescue equipment for every passenger is a fool. Has anyone ever flown on a plane and been told that his seat did not come with a flotation device or breathing apparatus? How is it that 100 years after the sinking of the unsinkable Titanic, cruise ships still have not figured out how to rescue all of their passengers?

These days, all vessels carry at least enough lifeboats and life-jackets for every person the vessel is designed for. In a disaster, it is common for not all of the lifeboats to be able to be launched (or launched safely) because of the disaster. Just as a car manufacturer could arguably produce a car that is totally safe for the occupants but no-one would buy it because of the expense, so no-one would buy cruise tickets costing many times the price of other cruises if the cruise operator tried to ensure 100% safety.

Travel is not 100% safe (nor is staying still). Not everyone can be saved, never mind how much we might try. The question of priority in who to TRY to save is therefore a valid issue.

By the way: crossing the road is still one of the most dangerous forms of travel. If we are to save women over men, perhaps women should be banned from crossing roads?

When I was a rich man I used to envy the pleasures that the poor people had. They seemed to be able to enjoy themselves much easier and free of much stress which comes as a consequence of the responsibilities and worries that seem to come with money..

Regards DMV's comment that the poor who expect the state to provide are thieves, ask yourself if it is truly valid to consider that one can thieve off a thief, what purposes should the state be expected to have if not to care for the health of the human cattle it controls and who truly gains the most from the state, the poor or the rich..?

Quote from felixblue

When I was a rich man I used to envy the pleasures that the poor people had. They seemed to be able to enjoy themselves much easier and free of much stress which comes as a consequence of the responsibilities and worries that seem to come with money..

Regards DMV's comment that the poor who expect the state to provide are thieves, ask yourself if it is truly valid to consider that one can thieve off a thief, what purposes should the state be expected to have if not to care for the health of the human cattle it controls and who truly gains the most from the state, the poor or the rich..?

Can you steal from a thief? No. But the poor are not stealing from the state. The state produces nothing. The poor are stealing from productive citizens through taxation, which is legalized plunder.

The purpose of the state is domination.

The poor who plunder the middle class are no different from the elite who plunder the middle class.

Those who receive money that they have not earned and those who have money that they have earned taken away from them and given to someone else lose the incentive to work.

People use the "let's help the poor" slogan the same way they use the "let's help women" and "let's help children" slogans.

Quote from Dylan MacVillain

Can you steal from a thief? No. But the poor are not stealing from the state. The state produces nothing. The poor are stealing from productive citizens through taxation, which is legalized plunder.

The purpose of the state is domination.

The poor who plunder the middle class are no different from the elite who plunder the middle class.

Those who receive money that they have not earned and those who have money that they have earned taken away from them and given to someone else lose the incentive to work.

People use the "let's help the poor" slogan the same way they use the "let's help women" and "let's help children" slogans.

Without the poor, the rich would not be rich. Who would manufacture the goods that the rich sell? Who would buy the goods the rich sell and who would run or use the services the rich profit from? It's symbiotic.

If the state "steals" on behalf of the poor then the state is a latter day robin hood and should be congratulated..

However I believe that the state steals on behalf of the state and "give unto ceasar what is ceasars" is the attitude the "taxpayers" should have..

A poor person can become a rich person, a rich person can become poor, but it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of god..

that unfortunate quote in the bible has been embarrasing to the rich folks for many centuries, but the greed and selfishness of the rich is what makes the poor feel justified in "stealing" from them..

Quote from felixblue

If the state "steals" on behalf of the poor then the state is a latter day robin hood and should be congratulated..

However I believe that the state steals on behalf of the state and "give unto ceasar what is ceasars" is the attitude the "taxpayers" should have..

A poor person can become a rich person, a rich person can become poor, but it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of god..

that unfortunate quote in the bible has been embarrasing to the rich folks for many centuries, but the greed and selfishness of the rich is what makes the poor feel justified in "stealing" from them..

Not all rich people are greedy. Many poor people are poor because they are lazy or cannot manage money. A person who has not earned money will not be able to manage it or respect others' property. The idea of taking from those who have and giving to those who do not is pure evil and is the root of communism. It is one of the main causes of the destruction of the West. And it is from this cauldron of filth that feminism has risen. If you support the redistribution of wealth and oppose feminism, you are in a serious conflict. There is no moral difference between 1) taking from a rich man because he's rich and giving that money to a poor man because he's poor and 2) taking from a man because he's a man and giving that money to a woman because she's a woman. It's the same principle: Don't take other people's shit.

Yep, it's different if people give of their own volition but when it is taken from them that's another story. If not for all the welfare and such a lot of poor people wouldn't even exist because they wouldn't have had the welfare to be born into poverty.