Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

In light of Canada's federal election today

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • In light of Canada's federal election today

    I thought I would post this for food for thought.

    IMG_1164.JPG


    Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

  • #2
    I'm wincing a bit at the way the sentences are constructed.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #3
      I did not write it.

      And your response doesn't surprise me.



      Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

      Comment


      • #4
        So when do we know if you Canuckistanis had a momentary lapse of sanity and booted Trudeau or not?







        Please note that I resisted making an obvious about/a boot joke there

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          So when do we know if you Canuckistanis had a momentary lapse of sanity and booted Trudeau or not?







          Please note that I resisted making an obvious about/a boot joke there
          Probably not until 10 or 11 PM local time, which is MDT. Polls don't close until 7:30.

          The election may well have been won before that, as the eastern provinces get counted first, and the large population areas of Montreal and Toronto have more seats then some of the other provinces and often carry the vote before polling even ends in, say, BC.

          Here's a list of the seats by province.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...oral_districts


          Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            So when do we know if you Canuckistanis had a momentary lapse of sanity and booted Trudeau or not?
            I say he ought to be impeached.

            ~ Russell ("MelMak")

            "[Sing] and [make] melody in your heart to the Lord." -- Ephesians 5:19b

            Fight_spam!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by The Melody Maker View Post
              I say he ought to be impeached.

              He should be prosecuted for the SNC Lavelin mess. But he won't be.


              Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

              Comment


              • #8
                Well, in case anybody cares, it looks like the Trudeau fiasco will continue for another 4 years.

                Here are early results. The Liberals lost about 27 seats, but the Bloc Quebecois basically came back from the dead. Last election there were quite a few Conservative seats in Quebec, those have been lost to the Bloc.

                Liberals also lost seats in Alberta, and so did the NDP. As of now there is only 1 NDP seat in Alberta. The rest are Conservative.

                These are not final results, but I doubt the Conservatives will win much in BC.

                https://enr.elections.ca/Provinces.aspx?lang=e

                Talking heads are saying that since there are no Liberal seats in Alberta now, Trudeau will back down from getting the trans-mountain pipeline to tidewater built.

                I fear that will be a further death knell for the oil industry here. Which suffered horribly during the last 4 years of both federal Liberal and provincial NDP regimes.

                A sad day for the province and the country.


                Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Trudeau is not my prime minister, never was and never will be. I'm sure he collided with the Russians to get extra votes.

                  I still say he ought to be impeached.
                  ~ Russell ("MelMak")

                  "[Sing] and [make] melody in your heart to the Lord." -- Ephesians 5:19b

                  Fight_spam!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                    I thought I would post this for food for thought.

                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]40354[/ATTACH]
                    The last two sentences are so Canadian. No wonder you lose, too nice, like sheep to the slaughter.
                    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity
                      Consider a world in which everyone except me was absolutely dirt poor, like really really subsistence poor. And I, renaming myself Scrooge McDuck, owned all the world's gold and resources. And they sat in my vault. And each day I did pretty much nothing with them, save perhaps had some fun in my vault:



                      I think it's pretty self-evident in such a situation that the poor would become richer if the money was taken off me and given to the poor. The world in general would be much better off.

                      So if the quoted statement above is meant to be some sort of logical truism that holds always and everywhere, then it is self-evidently not the case. In that sense, the statement is false, and obviously so.

                      If it is meant to be a contextual statement about Canada in the present day, the current distribution of money, how that money is currently being used to create prosperity, and the effects of possible laws being suggested to redistribute that... then, well, there's not really a way to know whether the statement is true or false - we would have to do quite a complex evaluation for each law individually and even then we would be only guessing at the effects. So it comes across as a bit idiotic to make such a claim as that statement does.

                      2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
                      It's been weighing on my mind lately how true this is, in the opposite way to what's meant here.

                      Some people earn money by working hard all day and being paid wages / salary. Other people earn money by doing nothing at all and their existing money generates more money for them (capital gains, investments). For want of better terms, we could call these two groups the hard workers and the idle rich. Inherently, the money that is accruing to the idle rich they are accruing without working for, and it is inherently coming to them at the expense of the hard workers who are not receiving the full worth of their hard days labor, as instead the idle rich are skimming their "profits" off the top.

                      So yes, the idle rich are bums who are basically stealing of the hard-working people, and that is the dumb way our economic system currently works. Unfortunately the person writing these idiotic statements basically meant the opposite and was trying to convince people to oppose the poor and believe the poor are the ones fleecing the system. It is amusing how often the rich and powerful try to convince people that it is the poor and destitute who really have all the power and who are really the ones who are ripping of the system, even as the rich and powerful are running out the back door with all the money, and amusing how often people fall for their ridiculous claims.

                      3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from someone else
                      This is either trivially true in an irrelevant way: Our whole economic system works by exchanges, e.g. a employer pays their employees out of the money their company has made from sales of goods in which they received that money from others, those employees then use that money to go out and buy goods and thus the money changes hands again, so as far as the money is concerned each person always takes it from the previous person and passes it to the next because that is how our economic system works (except if it gets into the hands of the rich where it gets stuck in the equivalent of a giant vault where it does nothing useful, see above, and this is a problem). So the government is no better nor worse than anyone else in this regard.

                      Or, more generally speaking, it isn't true. The government is in a unique economic position outside of the system of monetary transfer everyone else engages in. The government prints the money. Look at the money in your wallet, and whats written on it. Made by the government. The beginning of that note was not the government taking it from someone else as the claim above alleges. It began with the government having it made. More generally, the government magics money out of nothing all the time and that is what the Federal Reserve does and it delegates that power to banks to issue loans. Anytime you get a mortgage on your house or take out a loan, inherently that is money that the government has created for you to have (or specifically allowed the bank to create on its behalf).

                      While the majority of the money the government spends it has taken from the populace in taxes, not all of it is, and that doesn't have to be the majority source of govt expenditure (several modern libertarian economists have suggested the government should make more money out of nothing and primarily fund itself that way).

                      4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
                      This is a rather trite play on words. Mathematically, division isn't multiplication, sure.

                      But the more general idea its trying to express seems obviously false. A simple example would be diversified funds, where a person looking to make money essentially divides that money up among as many different investments as possible in order to ensure that even if some of those investments don't work that they still make a good return. So they are "multiplying their wealth" (investing at a profit) "by dividing it" (ie splitting it up).

                      In the case of whether Scrooge McDuck's vault of riches would serve the world better if it were spread amongst an impoverished world rather than sitting in his vault, the answer seems to be an obvious yes. And so that is another case where wealth would be multiplied by dividing it. A key concept in terms of understand why handing out Scrooge's dollars to an impoverished world is called "marginal utility", which refers to the usefulness each additional dollar has to a person who already has some amount. Consider Scrooge's giant money filled vault - if we put an extra dollar in his vault or removed a dollar from his vault, he wouldn't even notice, doing so would have no effect on anything. Hence the "marginal utility" of that dollar is zero - it has no effect when created or destroyed. But consider an impoverished person in Scrooge's world who has only pennies to their family's name, giving them an extra dollar would be huge for them, allowing them to massively transform their life, feed their family, buy something crucial. They might be able to put that money toward a bike to transport the to their workplace, which then might mean they could work an extra hour a day at work because their commute was faster than their previous walking, and so they create an hour a day more worth of products and earn an hour a day more of wages, and so then they create many more dollars worth of value of goods in the economy and equally more for their own pocket. So the marginal utility of that dollar given to that impoverished person is many many dollars. In the general case, the marginal utility of money is almost always more for a poor person than a rich person. So, yes, in general, taking money off a rich person and giving it to a poor person on average has the effect of improving the poor person's life more than it takes away from the rich person, and benefiting the economy in general by increasing total economic productivity.

                      5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work, because the other half is going to take care of them...
                      Let's be clear for a moment on who this 'half the people' is exactly. The idiot who wrote this probably thinks they are lazy bums who could work but don't. Canada's unemployment rate is currently less than 6%. So even if ALL the unemployed are lazy bums who aren't looking for a job and believe they don't have to work, they are 1/17th of the population. That is far, far, far from 'half of the people'.

                      But the statement is approximately correct insofar as about half the total population of Canada does work and about half do not. So who, in fact, is actually the half of the population who isn't working? The elderly. Children. Stay-at-home-mothers whose husbands are the bread-winners for the family. Is the idiot who wrote the statement seriously worried about children not being put into factories at the age of 5? Worried about an 80 year old granny getting a 'free ride' by not being forced to work for a living? Strongly against wives who opt for childcare duties while their husbands work? Of course not. The person is ignorantly pretending that the half of people who don't work are working-age people who choose to get government handouts rather than work, when in fact such people constitution an almost negligible fraction of the population.

                      Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?
                      I certainly wouldn't want people to think I was that stupid.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        tl;dr
                        The first paragraph did nicely summarize how the rich live in the minds of the left. Rather than investing their money which creates jobs they simply hoard it in vaults never spending a dime unless absolutely necessary. The funny thing is that could well be the result if the left had their way. Passing punitive taxes making it just not worth the risk to invest or expand and ever expanding regulations making it unprofitable to continue in business. So they simply close their businesses and enjoys the rest of their days relaxing and living off their accumulated wealth as more and more people no longer able to earn any sort of living fall to a subsistence level.

                        Just remember folks, just how many poor people have you ever worked for?

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by The Melody Maker View Post
                          Trudeau is not my prime minister, never was and never will be. I'm sure he collided with the Russians to get extra votes.

                          I still say he ought to be impeached.
                          Well, he rather obviously had foreign help....
                          I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Starlight
                            Some people earn money by working hard all day and being paid wages / salary. Other people earn money by doing nothing at all and their existing money generates more money for them (capital gains, investments). For want of better terms, we could call these two groups the hard workers and the idle rich. Inherently, the money that is accruing to the idle rich they are accruing without working for, and it is inherently coming to them at the expense of the hard workers who are not receiving the full worth of their hard days labor, as instead the idle rich are skimming their "profits" off the top.
                            Or you could use two neutral terms rather than two that are loaded and prejudiced. Why not 'the uneducated masses' and the 'benevolent sponsors'? Or 'labourers' and 'investors'?


                            But that would mean that you'd have to make a real argument instead of spouting nonsense.
                            Last edited by MaxVel; 10-22-2019, 10:21 AM.
                            ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                              The last two sentences are so Canadian. No wonder you lose, too nice, like sheep to the slaughter.
                              I don't know if a Canadian wrote that or not. I found it on Facebook.


                              Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by mossrose, Today, 03:05 PM
                              3 responses
                              41 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 01:53 PM
                              10 responses
                              48 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                              Started by Starlight, Yesterday, 11:51 PM
                              4 responses
                              35 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 07:32 PM
                              47 responses
                              230 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 06:22 PM
                              7 responses
                              78 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Reepicheep  
                              Working...
                              X