Page 3 of 60 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 890
  1. #31
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    People have a right to demonstrate as long as they do not leave rubbish behind and behave in appropriate manner without screaming obscenities at everyone around them (police included), turning Melbourne into big toilet.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #32
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,413
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    People have a right to demonstrate as long as they do not leave rubbish behind and behave in appropriate manner without screaming obscenities at everyone around them (police included), turning Melbourne into big toilet.
    Like some of the ‘environmentalist’ protestors and leftard ‘Occupy Wall Street’ in the USA.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  3. #33
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    I would rather see that: vouchers for a reasonable range of household items (including the sort of things that ER mentioned in his proposed healthy and decent food budget), but absolutely not for alcoholic drinks, tobacco, fizzy drinks, candy, or gambling. If they want these, let them get some paid work for them; they are not entitled to them as a right with money coerced from taxpayers.
    Fizzy drinks! Isn't it shocking that people might want a carbonated beverage or a beer on a long hot day! But Capablanca-Fan is happy to use government coercion to protect people from themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    But look at the leftist opposition to cashless welfare cards, where 20% of welfare money even goes to the person's bank account for discretionary spending and only 80% quarantined into that debit card for essentials.
    The opposition is because it doesn't work, since people can easily buy approved items and swap them for fizzy drinks. I already posted a response to that report, pointing out that the card was accompanied by other measures which make its evaluation difficult.
    Last edited by Patrick Byrom; 29-05-2017 at 01:06 PM.

  4. #34
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,413
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Fizzy drinks! Isn't it shocking that people might want a carbonated beverage or a beer on a long hot day! But Capablanca-Fan is happy to use government coercion to protect people from themselves.
    It's the opposite. I oppose government coercion to protect people from themselves. I leave that to you state-worshipping leftists, who just love sin taxes.

    In reality, I oppose government coercion of taxpayers to pay for other people's fizzy drinks. And cashless welfare cards allow people to spend 20% of this coerced money on fizzy drinks anyway, so people like you who think the government owns all the money should be happy. I endorse the following recently posted above:

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    You can negotiate other items. My point is - not to give money to those who misuse it. Furthermore, if they live off my money - I can act anyway I like. Once they start earning (if they ever plan to) they will have a right to spend own money as they please. While they are spending my money, I can decide how it is to be spent .
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    The opposition is because it doesn't work, since people can easily buy approved items and swap them for fizzy drinks.
    At least they have to make some effort then. Yes, it can be abused, but better than being able to spend >20% of welfare money on fizzy drinks (+ alcoholic drinks + tobacco).
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  5. #35
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    It's the opposite. I oppose government coercion to protect people from themselves. I leave that to you state-worshipping leftists, who just love sin taxes.

    In reality, I oppose government coercion of taxpayers to pay for other people's fizzy drinks. And cashless welfare cards allow people to spend 20% of this coerced money on fizzy drinks anyway, so people like you who think the government owns all the money should be happy. I endorse the following recently posted above:




    At least they have to make some effort then. Yes, it can be abused, but better than being able to spend >20% of welfare money on fizzy drinks (+ alcoholic drinks + tobacco).
    Lifestyles is another example of ''choices'' we make. Busy professionals jog regularly but some unemployed are ''too busy to go jogging'' Re fizzy drinks..I do agree we need to monitor what they spend on...but yes, lets start with alcohol and tobacco! By the way, as way as vouchers to ''buy'' food...could be vouchers given to go to some place to eat for free...eg. there are already some food vans operating in Melbourne feeding the needy.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  6. #36
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,569
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Busy professionals jog regularly but some unemployed are ''too busy to go jogging''
    So all busy professionals jog regularly. News to most busy professionals.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  7. #37
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    I can recall some loud protesters walking along the Burke street and I was work at RMIT at the time and having classes and students were asking me ''Michael, why are these people protesting on week day in the afternoon - do not they have a job to go to? ''
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  8. #38
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    Many do, or do other forms of exercise. They do find the time@. I certainly do.
    How many of the ''unemployed'' do?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  9. #39
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,569
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Many do, or do other forms of exercise. They do find the time@. I certainly do.
    How many of the ''unemployed'' do?
    Is there any evidence that these social paragons are significantly better exercisers than other classes of people or is it just something that feels true to you?
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  10. #40
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    Is there any evidence that these social paragons are significantly better exercisers than other classes of people or is it just something that feels true to you?
    I am pretty sure there are plenty of articles that covered it, can find some if still have doubts
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  11. #41
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,695
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    I am pretty sure there are plenty of articles that covered it, can find some if still have doubts
    You are right, there is quite a number of articles (government sources) regarding sedentary lifestyles and luck of exercise being proportionally higher in the unemployed. (*)

    Also lower income earners - incl. unemployed and aboriginals are among those who smoke, drink and use illicit drugs more than the rest of the population.

    I can't recall exact percentages and due to luck of time I do not intend to search!

    (*) Heart Foundation and AIHW come to mind.
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

  12. #42
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,695
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    People have a right to demonstrate as long as they do not leave rubbish behind and behave in appropriate manner without screaming obscenities at everyone around them (police included), turning Melbourne into big toilet.
    Michael please read my lips! Byron Jim was a human rights fighter including being an advocate for aboriginal land rights and all that jazz.

    However, when it came to his own interests being "threatened" by the black fellas he changed his tune.

    Moral of the story. Byron Jim was a hypocrite no matter how much he did or didn't litter the streets during his rallying for freedom and equality!

    There are plenty like him around!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

  13. #43
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    It's the opposite. I oppose government coercion to protect people from themselves. I leave that to you state-worshipping leftists, who just love sin taxes.
    Except that you do support government coercion to protect people from themselves, as I have pointed out before. It's pointless lying about this, when there is so much evidence to the contrary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    In reality, I oppose government coercion of taxpayers to pay for other people's fizzy drinks. And cashless welfare cards allow people to spend 20% of this coerced money on fizzy drinks anyway, so people like you who think the government owns all the money should be happy. ...
    So non-fizzy drinks are okay, but fizzy drinks will not be supported by the card? What have you got against carbon dioxide? And I can already see the enormous government bureaucracy that will be needed to adjudicate on this stupidity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    At least they have to make some effort then. Yes, it can be abused, but better than being able to spend >20% of welfare money on fizzy drinks (+ alcoholic drinks + tobacco).
    So you agree it doesn't work. There'll be no effort required - they just need to buy a leg of lamb with the card, and swap it with a working relative or neighbour for the equivalent amount of fizzy drinks. I would much prefer them to spend their time looking for jobs.

  14. #44
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,569
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    I am pretty sure there are plenty of articles that covered it, can find some if still have doubts
    Lack of pronouns make the last part of that sentence unclear but in general if you want to establish a fact you should support it with evidence. I've not seen the study which show that all busy professionals exercise regularly while most unemployed do not so I would be interested in your source.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  15. #45
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    Lack of pronouns make the last part of that sentence unclear but in general if you want to establish a fact you should support it with evidence. I've not seen the study which show that all busy professionals exercise regularly while most unemployed do not so I would be interested in your source.
    Googled it just now.
    First article that came up in search was:
    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakin...se-558706.html
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. China and totalitarianism
    By Patrick Byrom in forum Politics
    Replies: 461
    Last Post: 17-08-2019, 01:09 PM
  2. Use of the title "Dr" (sf welfare spending)
    By Ian Murray in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 14-05-2018, 02:37 AM
  3. Qualifications, meta-debates sf welfare spending
    By Capablanca-Fan in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 06-07-2017, 03:05 PM
  4. off-topic posts removed from welfare spending
    By MichaelBaron in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27-06-2017, 01:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •