Is there anything you place importance above your precious tax money.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Seriously though, logically, according to you, what would I do that for? What is there to gain, exactly?

Simple, attention.

Huh?
I could get “attention” with a thread that isn’t to “start crap to make it look like I care”.
So that would be unnecessary if I wanted what you claim.

& even so, what would I gain from baiting people for attention?
Is there some sort of power or reward received from that?

Honestly, I’d have thought that we’ve interacted enough times for a long enough duration for you to already know that is not what I do, or why I’m here on ATS.

I may spend a large part of my day here but I haven’t got to the point where I’m that invested in it. Yet anyways.

Just being honest with you, it's how I see it and from the looks of it I'm not the only one that can see it.


You usually bring up good points in your threads even if I don't agree you still give me reason to think about those questions but not so much with this thread.

a reply to: thesaneone

Fair enough, mate. You can’t all be wrong.
I’ll have to try and work on my approach in future.

You usually bring up good points in your threads even if I don't agree you still give me reason to think about those questions...

Likewise fella.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Don’t write to be understood. Write in a way that you can’t be misunderstood.


Either way, I don’t think I misunderstood you. We’re selfish. I get it.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: amazing

We don't need 24 alphabet agencies or secret spy agencies. We don't need 750 military bases around the world.

That’s debatable in my opinion.

It’s easy to complain about the MIC & IntelCom...
I just think it’s a bit naive as well, because my view of Earth without them at this particular point in history paints a much scarier picture for our planet, than a world with them.

That doesn’t mean there’s isn’t some problems or dangerous rogue elements...
But those dangerous rogue elements would be a much bigger problem if we didn’t have the abundance of good guys who make up the military and IC.




So in the case of taxes for those programmes, I’d argue spend better, not less.

Just consider this though. No one wants a world war and theoretically everyone want's to wipe out terrorists with the exception of several countries. So do we really need 750 military installations when we have so many allies with military might that would step in in any huge conflict such as UK, France, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany etc. You can see how we don't really need that many and we can still be safe.

Remember also that in the past we mainly had the CIA for external threats and the FBI for internal threats. More agencies means more cost, when two is all we really need.

It's simple budgeting. If I ran a business, why would I need 25 IT departments when I really only need 1?

a reply to: Hazardous1408

What about people who object to abortion on moral grounds?

Its hard to miss the hypocrisy in the laws, where a fetus isn't a person unless its part of the murder of its mother (in which case it results in 2 murder charges).

Either the fetus is human and worthy of a murder charge, or it is not.

That digression aside, some people see abortion as a moral quandry and don't want tax dollars spent on what they deem murder.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

And here you are assuming the worst about them as if just because no one mentioned charities, they weren't thinking about it.

I was waiting for the snide derision that Christians won't pay for abortion to be perfectly honest. Perhaps that's why no one mentions it? People who tend to make posts like yours have a reason why no potential solution is good enough or workable enough, it absolutely *has* to be government run and done through ever higher taxation for them.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I could list a myriad of examples as to why I ask this question, ranging from healthcare, to education, to basically any other issue revolving around a beneficial use towards a more prosperous society, or even beneficial use in assistance towards individuals for whatever reason.

But the example I’m going to use is one I’d never have thought I’d hear...
The case of the refugee rape victims who were refused an abortion because it was “for the best”...


I mean, I get it folks, I think there is tonnes of things taxes could be used more frugally, or even shouldn’t be used for at all...
That’s applicable to everyone I think, we don’t always find common ground on our limits, but our common ground is that we do all have limits overall.

So back to the example...
I’m pretty shocked that people would REEEE about their tax money being spent to help rape victims... refugee or not...
It’s not like it’s going to become an epidemic.
Also I’m not quite sure of the figures involved, but I don’t think abortions even cost that much money... you may correct me on that if you have seen data saying different.

So what would possess someone to be so, I want to say selfish, but there is probably a better adjective eluding me, with their “precious tax money”?

Many, will probably fall back on their religious ideals, and explain they oppose all abortion no matter what...
While I find this to be a bit of a cop out, at least in regards to rape victims...

I am also confident that God wouldn’t hold it against you to help a rape victim in desperate need.
Some may disagree with that. However as someone who believes in a merciful God, it’ll be hard for you to convince me otherwise.

So... back to my original point...
Is there anything you put above your precious tax money?

I’m currently disheartened & a little sad at the idea of ruling a rape victim unworthy of the benefit of taxes.
Because if they can be ruled unworthy, pretty much everyone and anything can be.

To me, that’s a pretty miserable path for humanity to take.

shouldnt one of those athiest churches have services for this?
or surely one of tnose satanist churches does right?
kind of like catholic services does?

oh they dont do that kind of work?
hmmm...thats interesting one would think they would put their money where their mouth is...

originally posted by: projectvxn

Don’t write to be understood. Write in a way that you can’t be misunderstood.

Thanks for the advice, never heard that phrase before.
I’ll definitely work on that from now on.

Either way, I don’t think I misunderstood you. We’re selfish. I get it.

Sorry you think I feel that way about you.
I’ve tried my best to describe who I was vexed at.

I’ll take this as a learning experience.

originally posted by: neo96

I could list a myriad of examples as to why I ask this question, ranging from healthcare, to education, to basically any other issue revolving around a beneficial use towards a more prosperous society, or even beneficial use in assistance towards individuals for whatever reason.

Yeah my money is important to me.

I didn't take the whole world to raise.

Agree. Which is why immigration (stopping it) is in the top part of my list (it's a somewhat short list). Taxes is down the line, I would rather see insurance cleaned up. When I think about how much money I have paid to insurance, it makes me sick.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

The thing is though, I wouldn't call it rape. It may be unwanted, but it's similar to a young actress sleeping with a producer to further themselves. 15 weeks along doesn't mean she wasn't impregnated by one of the coyotes. If shes pretty she may have been held at a house for a while before being taken across the border. If you ever get to talk to a Mexican woman that will be honest about what they endure on their venture, you will be mortified. They talk of it as being normal though, just something they have to do. I am mixed on the situation, I feel compassion for them, but also acknowledge they willingly make the choice knowing full well what will happen and what are the possibilities.

That is why I say consequences of choice, and consequences are simply results of choices, they can be either positive or negative.

a reply to: amazing

...theoretically everyone want's to wipe out terrorists with the exception of several countries.

It’s portrayed that way, but I’m not so sure there is only a few countries that wish to stop terrorism altogether.
It’s very beneficial to certain leadership types across the globe who are beholden to their handlers that want a total Big Brother society.

Terrorism is one of the only things that can be used to that end when a population they’re supposed to represent would be against a surveillance state.
I think Climate Change is the only other tactic towards that society.

The thing is, not fully combatting that terrorism can lead to a potential uncontrollable growth of membership in whichever terrorist group is on the offensive...
Once it’s out of control the only barrier between them and an overthrow is most likely those military bases and intelligence communities.

Without them bases, and fellow member project can probably attest to this given the locations he’s seen serving, the local warlord is in charge.
& communities controlled by the local warlord usually end up like countries being besieged by the likes of Boko Haram.

I understand your position, I just think there is a definite justifiable reason for those bases spread around.

Remember also that in the past we mainly had the CIA for external threats and the FBI for internal threats. More agencies means more cost, when two is all we really need.

For sure it is more costly.
That’s why I believe in the notion spend smarter, not less.

It really doesn’t matter if there is 1 Intelligence agency or 100, the only way it’s sustainable is by smart spending.
There is also the new reality that the world has changed drastically since the inception of the IC, and the amount of ways intelligence is gathered has grown exponentially.
That inevitably leads to a bigger agency.



It’s an interesting discussion though and I’m open to different opinions.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That digression aside, some people see abortion as a moral quandry and don't want tax dollars spent on what they deem murder.

I’m one of them. Vocally and unashamedly.
But I can put that belief to the side in the case of a rape victim.

Maybe it’s that shift in position in myself that makes me ask this question of others who feel similar about abortion.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Thanks for the advice, never heard that phrase before. I’ll definitely work on that from now on.

Truth be told, I'm still working on this one too.

Sorry you think I feel that way about you.
I’ve tried my best to describe who I was vexed at.

I’ll take this as a learning experience.

I'm not such an asshole that I can't accept this.

I will do the same.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

If you believe it is a human life then it must be treated as such. For example, it has a right to justice. And murdering for its provenance isnt justice

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Hazardous1408

There are plenty of charities that help refugees.

"At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
"Are there no prisons?"
"Plenty of prisons..."
"And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

...and a Merry Christmas to you, too.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If you believe it is a human life then it must be treated as such. For example, it has a right to justice. And murdering for its provenance isnt justice

I hold that opinion 99.9% of the time...

I just happen to be able to put my personal distaste for abortion aside in the case of rape (and danger to the mother).
Like I can put my beliefs on murder to the side in the case of self defence or the death penalty.

But I don’t find it to be a betrayal of my own morality overall that I can make exceptions.

a reply to: neo96

Congress also wants more money for settling their growing number of internal abuse cases.

When did we get the option of determining how our tax money is spent?

We can complain about it, but I don't remember that ever changing anything. The people doing the spending don't care how we feel about anything. We can complain about bank bailouts or keeping Gitmo open, but the money gets there anyway. We can complain that more money should be spent on this or that, but the government has its own priorities.

It doesn't really matter if we want tax money going towards abortions for refugee rape victims or not. Maybe what we should be complaining about is the fact that we really don't have any say in the matter.

Or we could complain about the weather. It would do just as much good.

originally posted by: dug88
Personally I'd prefer my taxes going towards helping rape victims get abortions than towards, funding wars, paying politicians exorbitant salaries, black ops, paying for prisons, and a whole bunch of other #ty things my taxes actually go towards.

I'd prefer it goes to buy the world a coke and sing in harmony.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
I could list a myriad of examples as to why I ask this question, ranging from healthcare, to education, to basically any other issue revolving around a beneficial use towards a more prosperous society, or even beneficial use in assistance towards individuals for whatever reason.

But the example I’m going to use is one I’d never have thought I’d hear...
The case of the refugee rape victims who were refused an abortion because it was “for the best”...


I mean, I get it folks, I think there is tonnes of things taxes could be used more frugally, or even shouldn’t be used for at all...
That’s applicable to everyone I think, we don’t always find common ground on our limits, but our common ground is that we do all have limits overall.

So back to the example...
I’m pretty shocked that people would REEEE about their tax money being spent to help rape victims... refugee or not...
It’s not like it’s going to become an epidemic.
Also I’m not quite sure of the figures involved, but I don’t think abortions even cost that much money... you may correct me on that if you have seen data saying different.

So what would possess someone to be so, I want to say selfish, but there is probably a better adjective eluding me, with their “precious tax money”?

Many, will probably fall back on their religious ideals, and explain they oppose all abortion no matter what...
While I find this to be a bit of a cop out, at least in regards to rape victims...

I am also confident that God wouldn’t hold it against you to help a rape victim in desperate need.
Some may disagree with that. However as someone who believes in a merciful God, it’ll be hard for you to convince me otherwise.

So... back to my original point...
Is there anything you put above your precious tax money?

I’m currently disheartened & a little sad at the idea of ruling a rape victim unworthy of the benefit of taxes.
Because if they can be ruled unworthy, pretty much everyone and anything can be.

To me, that’s a pretty miserable path for humanity to take.

shouldnt one of those athiest churches have services for this?
or surely one of tnose satanist churches does right?
kind of like catholic services does?

oh they dont do that kind of work?
hmmm...thats interesting one would think they would put their money where their mouth is...

Those broke ass churches are useless.

The govt is their real church, they have the money.

And who is raping these girls?

Is this what Trump meant by not sending their best?