By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Is it true that Americans are to this day afraid of socialism?

DonFerrari said:
sethnintendo said:

You are right any form of government can burn the forest down to clear land for farmers (which soil will be worthless to farm in only a few years), allow timber companies to have free range and boot natives out of their land.  It's just only accelerated at an exponential pace under the current regime.  Brazil was military ruled for a long time.  Maybe you guys should go back to it because your country is corrupt regardless who is in power.

I see you have a very shallow knowledge of the hefty of our ambiental legislation and regulation, and that it really isn't worth to destroy forest and make soil for a couple years, but well carry on with whatever you know about Brazil. In meanwhile the brazilian dictator forbidden any burn of woods/forest for the next 120 days.

People also need to know that deforestation does not happen because of one single goverment,it's more of a global responsibillity and even we as consumers take part in it.

Companies around the world and worldbanks stand behind deforestation,they invest in it and will surely put pressure on any goverment trying to forbid it for a while.



Around the Network
Torillian said:
Ka-pi96 said:

I mean I just used estimated figures, the tax free allowance and 40% tax threshold may be different than what I said.

It could also be that all of the income earned below the higher rate threshold is still taxed at the lower rate (which would actually make sense otherwise the difference between a pound below and a pound over the threshold would be kind of crazy).

That's usually how it works, but I wasn't sure if the UK worked differently than the US. In the US the money you make is all taxed based on the lowest possible threshold so your first 0-10k is taxed almost nothing while the 10-40k will get taxed more and so on and so on. This is part of why the idea of scoffing at a top marginal tax rate has no meaning because literally noone would actually pay it. 

In Brazil our income tax works in cascade.

Let's say you earn 10.000 a month, is married with 2 children and your wife doesn't work. Here is what it would look in Brazil (will use rounded just for idea).

Social Security, you pay 600 a month and that money is deducted from how much you are taxed

Dependents, you get another around 600 deduction

So the earning to be taxed is 8800.

The first 2000 is tax exempt

The next 1000 is taxed at 7,5%

The next 1000 is taxed at 15%

The next 1000 is taxed at 22,5%

The leftover 4000 is taxed at 27,5%

So from the 8800 you earn you pay 1600 in taxes.

This means that your effective tax is 16% (or if you want to consider after deductions 18%) instead of 27,5%.

Of course the more you earn the more you'll have taxed at 27,5% and closer you effective tax gets to 27,5%.

The biggest fight in Brazil by social democrats is to increase the income tax (that is exempt for low income people and not absurdly high for high income) while reducing or zero the taxes on goods and services (which usually ends up being much more significant and heavy for low income people and not so impacting for high income, even more when some of the most luxurious items have very little taxes).

Immersiveunreality said:
DonFerrari said:

I see you have a very shallow knowledge of the hefty of our ambiental legislation and regulation, and that it really isn't worth to destroy forest and make soil for a couple years, but well carry on with whatever you know about Brazil. In meanwhile the brazilian dictator forbidden any burn of woods/forest for the next 120 days.

People also need to know that deforestation does not happen because of one single goverment,it's more of a global responsibillity and even we as consumers take part in it.

Companies around the world and worldbanks stand behind deforestation,they invest in it and will surely put pressure on any goverment trying to forbid it for a while.

Very true, also while population grow need for food and goods also grow and technology and efficiency helps some but you'll also need bigger areas to meet that need.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
sethnintendo said:

You are right any form of government can burn the forest down to clear land for farmers (which soil will be worthless to farm in only a few years), allow timber companies to have free range and boot natives out of their land.  It's just only accelerated at an exponential pace under the current regime.  Brazil was military ruled for a long time.  Maybe you guys should go back to it because your country is corrupt regardless who is in power.

I see you have a very shallow knowledge of the hefty of our ambiental legislation and regulation, and that it really isn't worth to destroy forest and make soil for a couple years, but well carry on with whatever you know about Brazil. In meanwhile the brazilian dictator forbidden any burn of woods/forest for the next 120 days.

Next 120 days well guess that is a start?  

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-environment-idUSKBN24B1VG

"Deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon rose for the 14th consecutive month in June, preliminary government data on Friday showed, heaping further pressure on President Jair Bolsonaro who is under fire for worsening destruction of the rainforest on his watch.

Destruction rose 10.7% percent for the month, compared to June 2019, according to national space research agency Inpe. In the first six months of the year, deforestation is now up 25% to 3,066 square kilometers (1,184 square miles), agency data showed."

I see he called in the military earlier this year than last year to try and "protect" it. 

Like you said I don't know that much about Brazil just like you don't know much about my country.  Both countries we live in are corrupt.  I at least acknowledge the corruption and bullshit of my government.



sethnintendo said:
DonFerrari said:

I see you have a very shallow knowledge of the hefty of our ambiental legislation and regulation, and that it really isn't worth to destroy forest and make soil for a couple years, but well carry on with whatever you know about Brazil. In meanwhile the brazilian dictator forbidden any burn of woods/forest for the next 120 days.

Next 120 days well guess that is a start?  

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-environment-idUSKBN24B1VG

"Deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon rose for the 14th consecutive month in June, preliminary government data on Friday showed, heaping further pressure on President Jair Bolsonaro who is under fire for worsening destruction of the rainforest on his watch.

Destruction rose 10.7% percent for the month, compared to June 2019, according to national space research agency Inpe. In the first six months of the year, deforestation is now up 25% to 3,066 square kilometers (1,184 square miles), agency data showed."

I see he called in the military earlier this year than last year to try and "protect" it. 

Like you said I don't know that much about Brazil just like you don't know much about my country.  Both countries we live in are corrupt.  I at least acknowledge the corruption and bullshit of my government.

My country probably is even more corrupt than yours, didn't dispute that. Just asked for what does that have to do with my pointing that for as obtuse as our president may be and even for as most as he may wishes to be a dictator there really isn't any action he took that could be put as fascist dictator, and people that say he is doing that are just really taking the power and negative meaning of these two stuff and making it mean "if you disagree with me you are a fascist" similar to how some american used the "if you disagree with me you are a communist".

The ambiental protection and law in brazil needs to be severely improved to have a real GOOD impact, so that deflorestation doesn't keep increasing and the use of soil is better done. But really the most people can point that Bolsonaro did to increase deflorestation is his speech or some changes in institutes, still he didn't pass any law or pardoned criminals in the area. So yes he didn't do much good on the area but also isn't culprit for the worsening. And unfortunately media expend so much energy attacking him for everything and external media go with imprecise information that we go the way of misinformation and worse yet credibility issue for when the media attacks him for real bad stuff he may do.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Republicans and boomers are very afraid of socialism. Mostly because they were privy to the notion that if you work hard you can succeed and if you don't succeed then you're lazy, cold war era propaganda, and extremely low cost of living.

The world is quite different today. I have high confidence in gen z who score very high on empathy and very low on religion. We are heading in the right direction.



Around the Network
OhNoYouDont said:
Republicans and boomers are very afraid of socialism. Mostly because they were privy to the notion that if you work hard you can succeed and if you don't succeed then you're lazy, cold war era propaganda, and extremely low cost of living.

The world is quite different today. I have high confidence in gen z who score very high on empathy and very low on religion. We are heading in the right direction.

So you score very high on you don't need to work hard to succeed and if you want to be lazy you don't deserve to starve?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
OhNoYouDont said:
Republicans and boomers are very afraid of socialism. Mostly because they were privy to the notion that if you work hard you can succeed and if you don't succeed then you're lazy, cold war era propaganda, and extremely low cost of living.

The world is quite different today. I have high confidence in gen z who score very high on empathy and very low on religion. We are heading in the right direction.

So you score very high on you don't need to work hard to succeed and if you want to be lazy you don't deserve to starve?

Nice of you to leave out the important part, which I bolded for you.

Back in their heyday, if you were a hard worker you would eventually rise up the ranks and get well payed for it. But that's not true anymore. Today, an increasing amount of people are working well over 40 hours per week and yet are dependent on foodstamps and live paycheck to paycheck since upward mobility has all but vanished and the wages are not keeping up with inflation. People who are poor are not lazy, they are so poor they can't even afford to be lazy.

And don't need to work hard to succeed? Perfect description of most CEOs, Analysts and Stockbrokers, especially high frequency traders. All you need for those is enough money to get it starting, not be an idiot and being fully devoid of any empathy.



Who isn't afraid of socialism?

Its a facism regime that killed hundreds of millions of people. Everyone should be very afraid of it.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Nautilus said:
Who isn't afraid of socialism?

Its a facism regime that killed hundreds of millions of people. Everyone should be very afraid of it.

Fascism and Socialism are diametrically opposed to each other. That's like calling a republic a monarchy.

If you meant Communism or the Nazis with that remark, you should be aware that:

  1. Communism had deviated so far from Socialism that there was little left of it, and the way it was ruled was definitely outside of what socialism aimed for. Stalin was kicked upstairs to General Secretary because they wanted him out of the way as he was a corrupt Autocrat, but he used his new post to great degree as it gave him tabs on every in the party - especially his political ennemies. What the soviet Union had become was not because of socialism, but because of a crazy autocrat with delusions of grandeur. Stalinism has much more in common with fascism than actual socialism. Hence why actual socialists declared themselves the third camp after WW2, with the first one being the US and their capitalist allies, and the second one the Soviet Union and their subordinate states. 
  2. Nazis have socialism in their name, but in their own words that was just to attract voters and has nothing to do with what socialism really means. And if you go by that standard and that goalpost, then you could stay democracy and republics stand for totalitarian state that tracks your every move, lets it's people starve to death all the time and being decades behind the rest of the world. Why? Well, because of the German Democratic Republic and the Democratic People's Republic of North Corea. Just like they took democracy and republic and made hollow, meaningless words out of them, so did the Nazis with socialism.
  3. Neither are a direct result of the economic system in place. The "socialist" states that cropped up were mostly financed by the Soviet union and were thus to follow their doctrines. But again, that has nothing to do with socialism as an economic system.


Bofferbrauer2 said:
DonFerrari said:

So you score very high on you don't need to work hard to succeed and if you want to be lazy you don't deserve to starve?

Nice of you to leave out the important part, which I bolded for you.

Back in their heyday, if you were a hard worker you would eventually rise up the ranks and get well payed for it. But that's not true anymore. Today, an increasing amount of people are working well over 40 hours per week and yet are dependent on foodstamps and live paycheck to paycheck since upward mobility has all but vanished and the wages are not keeping up with inflation. People who are poor are not lazy, they are so poor they can't even afford to be lazy.

And don't need to work hard to succeed? Perfect description of most CEOs, Analysts and Stockbrokers, especially high frequency traders. All you need for those is enough money to get it starting, not be an idiot and being fully devoid of any empathy.

What have increased most in western countries is purchase on frivolous stuff. And sorry but paychecks only increase when you increase productivity, any other way just mean creating inflation.

Would you like to live in Brazil where we get 5-10% increase every single year? But that is basically ate by inflation (and/or generate inflation) while the tax isn't corrected the same speed.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."