which is the most civilsed nation on earth?
- Thread starter ZAGGIN
- 501 comments
- 11,856 views
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
danoff
Yes, I'd have to agree with you on that one.
But the thing about America is that we CAN change the way things are run. It may take some time. But it is possible and feasible. So I think we're coming from two different points of view here.
- 2,615
- Germany
- Wangan01
- Wangan01
danoff
Well by just adding my quotes it sounds like that indeed But it is this way : You get
because the government steals your money ... and in my opinion getting is bad for your health... And since I care for your health I suggested that you should stop getting angry about things you can't change... then I said that I do it that way... I didn't say that I care about paying more taxes that much ... I mean of course I like having more money, but I know ( I believe ) that it is necessary for our society (> civilized society )... I accept it and that's fine for me...In another thread ( I think it was the Alaska gas price thread) I said that in my opinion gas prices in the US are not high enough ( I pay about 6,50 US$ per gallon ) and I think that is a fair price.... you know for our environement and so on... My Sti easily blows 20 l / 60 miles into the orbit... I pay for destroying nature... sure I'd like to pay 10 cent per gallon, but I know it wouldn't work... so I stopped getting
about it : I know it is right and I enjoy reving my turbo up to 7500 rpm every day.....
- 10,116
- Maryland, USA
- swift-bass
Max_DCIn another thread ( I think it was the Alaska gas price thread) I said that in my opinion gas prices in the US are not high enough ( I pay about 6,50 US$ per gallon ) and I think that is a fair price.... you know for our environement and so on... My Sti easily blows 20 l / 60 miles into the orbit... I pay for destroying nature... sure I'd like to pay 10 cent per gallon, but I know it wouldn't work... so I stopped getting
That's fine and I'm glad you enjoy your expensive sport coupe and burning quickly through gas. But what does that have to do with our gas prices? Are you upset because we pay about a third of what you pay? Or do you just wish the you coudl get more the 10 miles to the gallon pushing your car so hard?
- 2,615
- Germany
- Wangan01
- Wangan01
Swift
Well this was just an offtopic example to explain the " don't get angry, that destroys your health" - thing.... so I put it very short ( I explained it in the alaskagasthread)... I think that gas has to be expensive... using a lot of gas has to hurt... then 90% of the people will help the environement by driving cars that don't need a lot of gas ( or with alternative energies ) and the rest will pay for the luxury ( destroying nature ) ... and so I don't think the USA should complain about "high" gas prices... put this has nothing to do with this thread, just because you asked....
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Coincidence? I think not. All of your so-called 'free' programs are part of the reason that EU gasoline prices are so much higher than in the US. You pay anywhere from 300% to 500% more than we do in taxes on each litre.Max_DC
You know, I know you didn't mean it to, but this is a great example of government rules restricting people's freedom. More importantly, you're saying that only rich people should be driving enthusiasts. Enthusists who are penalized to the point that most ordinary people over there drive little econoboxes, as well as lots of people that would really like to drive something faster. All reduced to mere spectators, nothing more. Sheep. Not rich? Sorry, you can't play. Oh, that's right--cars are just transportation. What are you doing here?
- 365
well, i lack knowledge about oil industry. i think that lower price in usa may be caused by production they have. uk and norway make a lot of oil, but being part of europe, i suppose they have to adjust the prices, even if it is not fair.
what do you think famine? uk should really have much lower price of petrol than rest of europe, just because you make your own, as usa. but being part of europe, it cant lower the price.isnt it like that?
also, usa is far superior to any other country in industry and has more means to generate income. so you dont have to rip off your own people on petrol 'cos you can get money from other sources.
what do you think famine? uk should really have much lower price of petrol than rest of europe, just because you make your own, as usa. but being part of europe, it cant lower the price.isnt it like that?
also, usa is far superior to any other country in industry and has more means to generate income. so you dont have to rip off your own people on petrol 'cos you can get money from other sources.
To explain why gas prices here are so low, you have to remember a couple things. First, there are NO public transit systems in most mid-sized american towns, and poor ones in many of the larger ones, especially in the spread-out west. Nothing like what exists in Europe. Second, you forget how big America is, and sparsely populated (relatively speaking) most of the country is, especially the west. It's not worth having passenger trains, even if it was the only form of transportation. Third, and most importantly, it's an independence thing. Most Americans have a major case of "Liberty Complex." I want to do WHAT I want WHEN I want it. Most wouldn't want to have to follow a train schedule, or not be able to go somewhere because there was no train or bus going someplace that day. Most Europeans have a great alternative to driving. Most Americans do not. Half my coworkers commute 20 miles daily--only takes about 15 minutes. And there is NO public transportation here besides a few taxis. And this is in a city of nearly 100,000 if you include the suburb cities. Cars are too important (practically and ideologically) here to tax the price of gas any higher.
- 1,766
Well one way or the other, taxes aren't stealing. We live in a democracy and the majority has decided that taxes should be paid. End of story. It would show a lack of morality if you would change the system in an undemocratic way. Democracy is the most important aspect of being civilized, so what the majority wants will be done in a democracy.
- 1,766
skicrush
Yeah, because large energy companies practically own the government.
- 1,766
Swift
Yeah the would agree to disagree.
- 87,833
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
smellysocks12
Don't confuse "democratic" with "morally just". As danoff says on many occasions, if the majority voted to imprison all redheads, would that be morally just because the majority wanted it?
"No", you say, "Because there's already laws about that.". Well, there's already laws about taking money off people...
Swift - Yes.
Too late--I already told you why. Did you miss the post by Duke that stated how much of our price for gas was because of taxes (20-30%), and how much of yours was for taxes (yours being anywhere from 60-200%, according to Duke. Wherever you live, besides Saudi Arabia or Venezuela or some other OPEC country). Most Americans would lynch their congressman if he voted for a hike in gas taxes.smellysocks12
- 1,766
Famine
Well, if taking money to save lives isn't morally just and letting people die when you can help them is... then I dunno what moral means. Then I don't care what is moral, because then I'm not a morally just person.
That's like you're walking down the street while someone is gets hit by a car and be like.... "Yeah sorry, I COULD call for help, but guess what, I won't. I am not going to call an ambulance, and that is morally completely right, because I don't HAVE to. It will cost me money to call the emergency number, so yeah I'm truthfully sorry but I need that money. Oh, it's free? Well I'm still not going to call.... since time is money, and I already spent too much time on you. Au revoir and my condoleances, have a nice funeral!"
To me being moral would be snatching that person's mobile phone from his hand and calling the emergency number, hoping that this person will make it.
- 1,766
skicrush
Yeah, that was a sarcastic comment by me which is probably true in a way since politicians are for sale during elections. By sponsoring the election campaign companies can attach a string to the puppet in his nice suit. I know about the tax difference between Europe and the USA, I already knew about that when I was 12. I also know that Americans would lynch anyone trying to multiply taxes on gas. That is because the public transit system in the USA simply isn't good enough. Understandable, because the distances are are way bigger in the USA. You wouldn't want to sit next to a fat slob (of which you guys have more than enough) for hours in a stinky bus.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,113
- Mile High City
That's right, stealing from someone is not moral, even if you do it to save someone's life.
Using your OWN money to help someone is another story. You don't quite hae the hypothetical scenario situated.
You and a friend are walking down the street. Your friend has no money and after a week or so he starts to starve to death. You have just enough money to keep yourself alive, so if you give your friend any you'll both die eventually. So you can't help your friend but you aren't in immediate trouble (unless you want to give your life to save his).
Now, a rich dude is walking down the street too. He has more than enough money for all three of you. You approach him
"Hey rich dude, my friend is dying will you give me money?"
"Your friend is white and I don't like white people." Says the rich dude. "Your friend is also a devil worshipper and I don't like devil worshippers. I won't help you."
...now here's where morality comes into play. You have a gun.
Is it moral (civilized) for you to rob the rich man of his cash that he is not willing to part with to give to your dying friend? That's what the redistribution of wealth is. It's robbing from the rich to give to the poor. It isn't just giving your own money, it's taking someone else's.
- 1,766
If that guy who is starving did all he could and tried everything to get money to buy food, I think it is morally just to rob a rich person of his pocket money (without doing physical damage) to be able to buy food. This is the condition that is applied in many types of social security, which I think is just. That's my opinion. I know I would rob someone if I or a friend would be starving, so would danoff and famine. You guys probably will respond saying that you wouldn't, but it's easy to speak when you're not in that situation.
Criminals don't give up their rights. It might be written in the law, but who decides whenever someone's rights are violated enough to execute someone? Is the death penalty morally right after someone killed a person? What if they nearly killed a person? Would death penalty be just when someone stole a Mars bar from a store? I guess that woman in Iran who got stoned to death after being convicted because she was raped REALLY deserved it. It was written in the law, she violated the rights of her future husband of being able to marry a virgin. The type of thinking you display with this post really is some type of wild wild west thinking. Yeee haw cowboy, make 'em squeal like a pig.
danoff
Criminals don't give up their rights. It might be written in the law, but who decides whenever someone's rights are violated enough to execute someone? Is the death penalty morally right after someone killed a person? What if they nearly killed a person? Would death penalty be just when someone stole a Mars bar from a store? I guess that woman in Iran who got stoned to death after being convicted because she was raped REALLY deserved it. It was written in the law, she violated the rights of her future husband of being able to marry a virgin. The type of thinking you display with this post really is some type of wild wild west thinking. Yeee haw cowboy, make 'em squeal like a pig.
