Quantcast
The state of illinois issued lay off notices to hundreds of employees because the sweetened beverage tax was delayed

Forums - Politics Discussion - The state of illinois issued lay off notices to hundreds of employees because the sweetened beverage tax was delayed

vivster said:
Just another reason why taxes should be handled on the federal level. God I hate state rights.

Nation rights should also be superceeded by a World government for the betterment of out species 



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
KLAMarine said:

Yes and according to http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h986.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1790_United_States_Census , the population in 1790 was a little under four million. Today it's over 300 million and population density has only climbed despite the growth of the US's surface area which stopped after Hawaii joined our Union in 1959.

With that in mind, you state "Proportionally the number of people with intentions to hunt and fish are smaller than they were then" and I must ask for raw numbers. 100% of 1790's US population is a little under four million, obviously. 1% of today's population is very close to 1790's 100% and 2% of today's exceeds 1790's total population.


That's a lot of white space.

15.7 million Americans hunted in 2013, in a country that is 4.7 times larger (by area) than in 1790. Furthermore, the number who hunted more than once per year is likely much smaller than the number who would've in 1790, because hunting was for many -- required to survive back then. 

To remain on topic, though, consider that the number of people who would love to live in the woods away from the greater society is very infinitessimal, and so would be their environmental impact. 

Notice that almost the whole west is red. The only reason the U.S government doesn't claim the east is because the people there had already homesteaded it. 

Still seeing more white than red. That's a lot of room for the infinitessimally small number of people who want to escape taxes and the conveniences brought about by paved roads and such.



KLAMarine said:
outlawauron said:

Uh, this just isn't true. 

They will find a way to get their money.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think this video had much, if anything, to do with taxes.

Well, I took your statement to be a general one amount money being paid to the government. He was being evicted from his home on his property because he didn't have government utilities (water, electricity, heat, etc). That's due to $$, and not anything else.



Government logic at its finest:

Hey guys, we really need this new tax to pay for all these non-essential government workers, but since the tax has been delayed we can now fire these guys while still screwing over our constituents by implementing the unnecessary new tax anyway!



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

outlawauron said:
KLAMarine said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think this video had much, if anything, to do with taxes.

Well, I took your statement to be a general one amount money being paid to the government. He was being evicted from his home on his property because he didn't have government utilities (water, electricity, heat, etc). That's due to $$, and not anything else.

Worth a read: http://www.fox10tv.com/story/29326010/city-responds-to-couple-trying-to-live-off-the-grid



Around the Network
KLAMarine said:
outlawauron said:

Well, I took your statement to be a general one amount money being paid to the government. He was being evicted from his home on his property because he didn't have government utilities (water, electricity, heat, etc). That's due to $$, and not anything else.

Worth a read: http://www.fox10tv.com/story/29326010/city-responds-to-couple-trying-to-live-off-the-grid

 

Did you read your article? It clearly says they are required to get permits, in other words give us money (taxes) and we will let you live the way we say you can. Sounds like pay up, do what we think is best for you and its all good. Not being allowed to live in a trailer is a bad excuse, they simply want to control what he can and can't do, but will allow it if he ponies up cash. Besides his trailer looks nice, not run down. He has what he needs, but they feel he needs to listen to their rules for the benifit of others that he isnt actually effecting. I don't buy it. How much are the permits? who gets to approve them? he isn't stealing city resources.

thranx said:
KLAMarine said:

Worth a read: http://www.fox10tv.com/story/29326010/city-responds-to-couple-trying-to-live-off-the-grid

Did you read your article? It clearly says they are required to get permits, in other words give us money (taxes) and we will let you live the way we say you can. Sounds like pay up, do what we think is best for you and its all good. Not being allowed to live in a trailer is a bad excuse, they simply want to control what he can and can't do, but will allow it if he ponies up cash. Besides his trailer looks nice, not run down. He has what he needs, but they feel he needs to listen to their rules for the benifit of others that he isnt actually effecting. I don't buy it. How much are the permits? who gets to approve them? he isn't stealing city resources.

Yes, I read the article. Did something I posted suggest that I didn't?



sc94597 said:
KLAMarine said:

Yes and according to http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h986.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1790_United_States_Census , the population in 1790 was a little under four million. Today it's over 300 million and population density has only climbed despite the growth of the US's surface area which stopped after Hawaii joined our Union in 1959.

With that in mind, you state "Proportionally the number of people with intentions to hunt and fish are smaller than they were then" and I must ask for raw numbers. 100% of 1790's US population is a little under four million, obviously. 1% of today's population is very close to 1790's 100% and 2% of today's exceeds 1790's total population.

That's a lot of white space.

15.7 million Americans hunted in 2013, in a country that is 4.7 times larger (by area) than in 1790. Furthermore, the number who hunted more than once per year is likely much smaller than the number who would've in 1790, because hunting was for many -- required to survive back then. 

To remain on topic, though, consider that the number of people who would love to live in the woods away from the greater society is very infinitessimal, and so would be their environmental impact. 

Notice that almost the whole west is red. The only reason the U.S government doesn't claim the east is because the people there had already homesteaded it. 

Considering that your claim had been "Proportionally the number of people with intentions to hunt and fish are smaller than they were then", I think it is pretty disingenuous to claim the number 15.7m is the relevant one.  (That appears to me to be the figure for hunting alone; fishing is more than 44 million as indicated by both the graph and the text of the article.) 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Final-Fan said:

Considering that your claim had been "Proportionally the number of people with intentions to hunt and fish are smaller than they were then", I think it is pretty disingenuous to claim the number 15.7m is the relevant one.  (That appears to me to be the figure for hunting alone; fishing is more than 44 million as indicated by both the graph and the text of the article.) 

Considering I said proportionally I stand by it. More people out of the total population likely fished in their daily lives in 1790 than 2017, because the 1790 population was almost 99% agrarian and rural. 

If I was talking about absolute numbers, that would be a different matter. 



sc94597 said:
Final-Fan said:

Considering that your claim had been "Proportionally the number of people with intentions to hunt and fish are smaller than they were then", I think it is pretty disingenuous to claim the number 15.7m is the relevant one.  (That appears to me to be the figure for hunting alone; fishing is more than 44 million as indicated by both the graph and the text of the article.) 

Considering I said proportionally I stand by it. More people out of the total population likely fished in their daily lives in 1790 than 2017, because the 1790 population was almost 99% agrarian and rural. 

If I was talking about absolute numbers, that would be a different matter. 

That doesn't address nor explain the fact that you clearly used the wrong number, but I'll move on. 

In that case, since the only realistic comparion in terms of environmental impact (the context in which these figures were used) compares the number of people to the area of land on which they lived in each time period, and not percentage of total population engaged in that activity then and now, how do you explain your misinterpretation? 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom!