|
| Thread: The CCP is Exploiting us!! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
PandaTar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
|
posted November 17, 2020 08:08 PM |
|
|
That was already made. And accord of sorts some years ago, I think it had the support of The Netherlands and Germany. It did not work as intended, for bad use of said investment and both countries withdrew their apport. It was pre-Bolsonaro.
What's left is ACTO (Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization) and the little it can do these days. A good part of our army is directed there to help with Amazon issues. There are a lot of criminal fires too, mainly caused by sawmill owners and farmers. But having these soft laws and flagrant being a necessity, they go unpunished. Still, there are too many occurrences on the same place throughout the years, it could have been mapped long ago. And if it is, something else is missing.
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS – Portal 2
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 06:24 AM |
|
|
fred79 said:
which is why, these same vermin at the top, outsource jobs to make even MORE money off the poor.
Well yes, being at the bottom is harsh, however for me the question is not how to reward it better - the market can't be cheated, but how to climb the ladder and get out from there. And there is where personal decisions play.
Instead of comparing yourself to others, compare to who you were yesterday and see if you got any better.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 06:31 AM |
|
|
for me it's a moral issue. i'm not fond of predatory behavior among humans; and capitalist greed encourages predatory behavior.
that said, i'm not fond of sharing wealth with the undeserving, either. i hate parasitic behavior as much as i hate predatory behavior. it all boils down to morals, imo.
people should get what they deserve.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 10:27 AM |
|
|
Salamandre, we are living in the 21st century. In case you hadn't noticed, living conditions are generally pretty decent, and it's not about finding food for the next day and having some shelter anymore, at least for most of the people.
In fact, when you think about it, the economy depends on people having and spending money (and note that I didn't say EARNING). If people suddenly decided that going for a holiday wasn't cool anymore (something you kind of see this year) this had massive consequences.
The economy works because a majority of people has enough money and spends it for stuff that doesn't serve the most basic needs. People spend a lot of money for BETTER housing, for cars, for luxury food and drink (and not just bread and water), and so on.
Also, some revenue models have changed. Think about youtube, advertisement and clicks, for example.
Then think about how many billions are pumped into the economy now that things are on hold in some areas.
Then think about the fact that the simple jobs are eaten up by automatization.
So what do you do with the people who are a bit simpler than the rest and are poor?
In my opinion, you need a minimum wage that allows DECENT living, not just craping by. People who actually work should be able to not just scraping by and have to live in some squalid back alley.
Which would leave a lot more room for people who do not work for some reason or other to simply get life's necessities, but not more.
See, it must be WORTH IT to work, POSITIVELY, not negatively. Sure, when you labor 8 hours a day for the same or a tad more money you can get via welfare - why get a job at all?
Capitalism wants to maximize the profit and minimize the costs - but the economy has changed. In earlier times and not that long ago, interest rates were very high and people HAD TO maximize profits in order to be able to pay for their loans. Money was scarce. This has dramatically changed. If you are in solid work and you want to take a loan for 360.000 € to buy a small house for your family, in earlier times you'd have had to pay something like 2.500+ € on interest rates alone per month. Today, you'll probably get by with as much as 500 € per months and then another 300, 600 or 900 € per month, depending on your conditions for repayment - which is actually affordable for a lot of people.
There is nothing wrong with making sure that everyone has a shelter and enough food, when society has so much more to offer TO WORK FOR.
So, in simple words: Increase the minimum wage to a decent level and shorten the max wages for executives (they get success boni anyway, so wage can be lower). There is too much waste at the top and not enough at the bottom.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 10:45 AM |
|
|
The idea of raising the minimum wage is noble, but many of the arguments rely upon raw emotion and ignore economic ramifications that will heavily impact the same people it's trying to help.
Big companies like Amazon or Microsoft will be able to afford it, but employers, especially small family and midsize businesses, will be disproportionately hurt by the extra costs incurred. The local stores and businesses with very thin profits will be forced to raise prices to make up for the addition labor costs. With the increased prices, customers may choose to take their business elsewhere. Losing customers means losing income, which will result in the business having to layoff workers.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 10:46 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 10:48, 18 Nov 2020.
|
@ jj:
i agreed until the end. a significant amount of the poor burn through their paycheck, as well. anything beyond what they have to use to pay bills, is constantly spent frivolously.
and that's not even covering the hordes of people who abuse the welfare program.
from everything i've seen, there are just as many(if not more) parasites bleeding decent people dry(through their taxes), exploiting racial privileges, and constantly stealing all the time; or looting, when that isn't enough for them, as there are predators at the top exploiting everyone below them.
@ sal: good point. but then if those small up-and-coming companies didn't have expenses through the roof that the predators at the top caused, they'd likely be able to afford it. the extra capital paid, would be redistributed to the people actually HELPING them.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 10:56 AM |
|
|
No.
It's the same points that were made against minimum wage as such, when it was introduced.
They were obviously wrong, because minimum wage didn't actually have that effect.
It's basically not so different from healthcare. Sick people MUST be treated and not let die, whether they can pay or not. People with health care and/or money can afford BETTER care and treatment.
This is and should be the main difference in OUR time as opposed to the Dark Ages. People shouldn't starve or die from sickness anymore or be forced to beg or steal, if all else has failed. People should WORK for a tad more than the naked existence.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 11:05 AM |
|
|
Getting free medical assistance, free housing, free food, all that costs money and money doesn't materialize from thin air. Someone has to pay.
So far, our societies sway on the thin razor of colossal debts - especially because they placed raw emotion before common sense considerations, individualism before group interest. Moreover we see how recessions or unexpected pandemics can turn everything upside down.
That is Nirvana.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 11:05 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 11:09, 18 Nov 2020.
|
@ jj:
the problem is many develop bad health from their lifestyle(food/exercise/environment).
also, nobody i ever saw steal, HAD to steal. they just did because they were scum who didn't want to pay for anything.
if you've ever worked at a grocery store, you'll know what i'm talking about. if you've ever worked at one next to a ghetto, you'll be even more informed. and if you know that most of those in the ghetto are on welfare with no job but still wear more expensive clothes than you and drive more expensive cars and can afford to go out to eat at actual restaurants much more frequently than you because they're not paying the same amount as you are for life simply because of their race, you'll be even MORE informed.
these same people exhibit some of the worst behavior i've ever seen in humans while they were out in public.
for an easy example, have you ever heard about the "shopping cart theory"?
working at a grocery store, you find out quick fast and in a hurry, what kind of people are garbage, and what aren't. in ALL classes.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 12:56 PM |
|
|
This discussion makes no sense, because you aren't reading what is written.
Repeat: why would you work in a minimum wage job when you'd get the same money out of it than the money you can cash in from welfare? Strangely enough, for most people, you included, it's ok that capitalism is about making a profit, but you don't see the profit in getting the same or nearly the same money for NOT working than for working? It's still called making a profit.
So under the GIVEN rules it's more PROFITABLE to not work at all and get welfare than to work at a minimum wage job - but that is not the fault of the people. So why do you expect the poor people to "do the decent thing" suddenly and forget "profit", when no one else does?
That makes no sense.
That's why I said there must be a real difference between what you earn with decent work and what you get via welfare.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 01:07 PM |
|
|
i don't know, integrity? you have to start somewhere. your argument implies everyone is a waste of space who wants undue gains for 0 effort.
you're describing unworthy slobs. which, btw, many youths who have minimum wage jobs, are these days.
still, i think a better minimum wage, or starting point, might help send the right message to people. there ARE decent people out there who certainly deserve better.
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted November 18, 2020 01:22 PM |
|
|
|
It is pretty cutthroat to create a system that in some cases encourages and rewards slob behavior, and then to call them slobs after baiting them into it.
|
|
PandaTar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 02:35 AM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
But considering that all homeless are somehow victims of "wealthy and immoral" people therefore the wealthy people should provide them with all commodities is foolish, then fascism when you add the option to seize their earnings and just hand them out.
I just read something that's happening at the neighbor Argentina. Rich people are leaving and going to Uruguay. There was this new tax rule going on, charging a lot more people with wealth. The intention is to collect up to 300 billion in taxes. But this exodus started when the inclination for a left wing to win elections was evident and unchanging. So, the rich started to literaly flee. What to do in a country with rising economical problems, no incentive for investments, ridiculous taxing ... that's a death sentence for investors.
Meanwhile, Uruguay has elected a right wing president after 15 years of left rule, and he's promoting investments on his country, which fits those of Argentineans. Tax evasion is being gradually surpevised in Uruguay the last years too, as not to make the country a paradise for that practice. Even so, it's a better scenery for investments than the other country. And that's what happens when you try to solve a whole country's problems by trying to make a strict group of people shoulder them instead.
It reminded me of another situation in which an activist, who is largely known for causing trouble and not to have worked once in his life (he even looks like a bearded Che Guevara), telling down one of the richest entrepeneurs here, that he was too rich, that he ought to give to the poor, that it was his fault that there were so many social problems. You get the picture of how such things drones on. And the entrepeneur simply stated: "I was born in the slums. My parents worked hard to give me education. And I used it to get where I am, through hard work. I earned what I have with my own sweat and I reward and help those who do the same. I have companies that employ thousands of people. You could be one of them, if you were interested in work or interested on facing life with a straight face, instead of blaming others for your disguised lazyness". And that's something that's been happening a lot around here lately. Suddenly, all rich people became guilty of problems that have been brewing for many years, caused by all the community.
There are a lot of equality questions rising here and there around the world, but it feels like they segregate the world even more. It's very difficult to find the way.
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS – Portal 2
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 08:21 AM |
|
|
PandaTar said:
It reminded me of another situation in which an activist, who is largely known for causing trouble and not to have worked once in his life (he even looks like a bearded Che Guevara), telling down one of the richest entrepeneurs here, that he was too rich, that he ought to give to the poor, that it was his fault that there were so many social problems. You get the picture of how such things drones on. And the entrepeneur simply stated: "I was born in the slums. My parents worked hard to give me education. And I used it to get where I am, through hard work. I earned what I have with my own sweat and I reward and help those who do the same. I have companies that employ thousands of people. You could be one of them, if you were interested in work or interested on facing life with a straight face, instead of blaming others for your disguised lazyness". And that's something that's been happening a lot around here lately. Suddenly, all rich people became guilty of problems that have been brewing for many years, caused by all the community.
There are a lot of equality questions rising here and there around the world, but it feels like they segregate the world even more. It's very difficult to find the way.
I hope you spotted the key sentence here, and the contradiction:
My parents worked hard to give me education ... And I used it to get where I am, through hard work. I earned what I have with my own sweat.
See the problem? HIS PARENTS worked FOR HIM, and he earned what he has with THEIR sweat as well.
So what about those whose parents did NOT work hard to give them education? Their fault? As it's not his merit that his parents did work hard for him to get an education. It's his merit that he used the opportunities his parents gave him, but without those opportunities . bad luck.
And the rich fleeing the country to where the profits are fatter? You don't want to know what I think about them. They should be disposessed of their immobile assets. The problem is they get away with this.
Talk about taxes. You know that self-employed people declare their taxes (other than workers who have their taxes deducted right away), depending not on their earnings, but on their profit. If you don't have a profit or a low profit - no tax. And these people don't hire their tax advisors for nothing (whose work is tax-deductable), they know how to reduce their profits - just look at Donald Trump.
Repeat this: Taxes are only deducted from what you actually keep as a profit. So when some rich guy has to pay 10 million tax, it's 10 million as a percentage of what is left AFTER all deductions for health, for interest rates on relevant loans, for business travels, for advertisement (keep in mind that here "business parties and invitations count as well - you go to dinner in a high-class restaurant and it's tax-deductable when you say it was a business dinner; drinks and gifts for business visitors and so on) and so on and on. When they have to pay 50% tax and pay 10 million, they had 20 million as a net bottom line. It's complaining on a very high level.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 09:26 AM |
|
|
The same who preaches globalism at unprecedented levels - no borders, no nations (thing of the past - direct quote) gets angry when people use it in their interest. Oh my !
Genuinely proposing to just disposes manu militari people from their hard work earnings, because muh not nice people, they flee in other countries to save their wealth. From a predatory state. Sure they do, who is that dumb to stay and be plundered?
See, this is why smart people will stop voting left more and more, precisely because of this insane radicalizing on its most left side.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 10:29 AM |
|
|
That's just unreflected nonsense. Things don't develop from yesterday to today. History shows that the more radical left a country slides into, the more abused was the population. You know this: if things are alright for the majority of the people, they vote STABILITY, which is somewhere down the middle, maybe with little accents depending on the system, but neither too left nor too right.
People vote left when they feel exploited, and people vore right when they feel threatened (themselves or their relative wealth).
So when people vote left, you can bet that the financial elite has gone too far. A small wealthy elite and a suffering population is what will make people vote left.
In case you didn't notice, there are two different "classes" of rich people - one flees into tax paradises, the other writes open letters to their governments and demand to increase the tax rates for themselves and the other rich people - yes, there are those.
Lastly, and this is again dishonest of you - yes, I'm a globalist. But I'm a globalist EXACTLY because of that: our ECONOMY is global, but the different laws and what is factually a competition of trying to lure investments into a country be groveling before big corps is not. We must adjust global laws to the fact that there is a global economy.
And it leads to silly things, like smuggling cigarettes (which is the consequence of vastly different taxes on cigarettes, for example in Germany and Poland).
Your country wouldn't work, if you had locally different tax rates on stuff. The world isn't different. Just bigger.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 10:37 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 13:34, 19 Nov 2020.
|
Well, of course you can’t take away people’s houses arbitrarily and give it to the poor, depending on they are using them or not, that’s not a metric you can apply a law to. What you can do, is tax the ultra-rich propotionally and use state funds for proper basic education and health service, which is what most Nordic countries do as far as I know, compared to U.S. type wild capitalism, the results are better, not radical.
Here’s the thing, back in the times of Marx, there was almost no social mobility, no scholarships, no welfare at all, it was dozens of worker families in small apartments, living in conditions worse than feudal serfdom. It was not something you can work your way up either, because that level of poverty is like destiny, you lack the instruments to climb your way up, you’re lucky if you can learn to read and write. Now, the communists calculated that this conflict was going to result in revolution, that it was inevitable. But instead, communism lead to countries with advanced industry, middle classes and democratic politics to nerf capitalism. (These were the countries Marx was expecting a revolution in.) Meanwhile, some authoritarian states without such conditions transformed into communist dictatorships.
From this point on, capitalism was basically an “ideology” that favored the middle-classses, think of the 1950’s, usually only the man works, but a middle-class family can save up for a house, a car, sometimes two cars... Where as in today’s U.S., this is not the way things are anymore. The ultra-rich buy the politics, they have transnational companies with sweat-shop worker class in China, they pass any law they pay for, meanwhile people, even if they work all their life, cant afford to buy a house, even if both the man and the woman is working. So what happens is, right-wing populism is on the rise again, and it is even using leftist rhethoric when it needs to just like the “national socialists” of the 1930’s, (Mussolini also has a socialist past).
Anyway, I got to go eat lunch.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 11:53 AM |
|
|
Well of course the rich must be taxed proportionally, the problem is that people on left think proportionally is something around 70-80%.
The metric should not be how many trillions one makes- therefore take him almost all because there are still 20 millions left, but how much the state can ask an individual to work for others : a quarter of his time, half, 3/4 and so on, before it is unsustainable.
So far, the wealth movements and evasions show that above 40%, people will just find ways to avoid or they move elsewhere. So is settled, no matter how some would want to bleed them.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 12:51 PM |
|
|
The problem is you don't understand how tax works, Salamandre.
So here's taxes 101, just for you.
Only NET income is taxed - I already explained that above, and there are insane ways to reduce your net income.
Tax percentages work in tiers. In European states it works that way, that you don't pay taxes at all for the money below a certain Threshold, for simplicity's sake, let's assume it's 12.000 € per person. So this money is taxfree.
The next tier may be something like 20% payable from the NET money earned from 12.001 - 30.000 €.
The next tier might be from 30.001-60.000 €, at 30%, and simply
from 60.001+ 40%
So someone with a net income of 60.000 € would pay:
0 € from the first 12.000 €,
3.600 € from the next 18.000 € and
9.000 from the next 30.000 €.
The actual tax rate here is 21%
A guy with 120.000 € net income would pay 36.600 € in taxes which equals 30.5% in taxes.
Now, keep in mind if the wife works something that brings in a couple of books they can be taxed together, add their income and double the rates, greatly reducing the tax.
This would be a moderate tax for European Standards. When we talk about higher taxes for the rich, the question is what tier and what percentage.
In general this means something like restricting the 40% up to something like 500.000 € and then go up to 50% above that. Plus, there might also be a tier above, say 10.000.000 for a higher tax.
This tax, though, is fairly ineffective for some reasons. Much better is the dividends or capital gains tax.
It doesn't make any economical sense to tax the poor, because the poor spend their money anyway. They pay rent, they have to eat, they have to buy clothes, they may have kids who cost money as well. Chances are, they may even be in debt. The money they spend fuels the economy and keeps it going anyway.
Why should it matter how much of their working time someone spends in taxes? It also doesn't matter how much of their working time someone has to spend to pay the rent.
|
|
PandaTar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
|
|
posted November 19, 2020 05:00 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
I hope you spotted the key sentence here, and the contradiction:
My parents worked hard to give me education ... And I used it to get where I am, through hard work. I earned what I have with my own sweat.
See the problem? HIS PARENTS worked FOR HIM, and he earned what he has with THEIR sweat as well.
So what about those whose parents did NOT work hard to give them education? Their fault? As it's not his merit that his parents did work hard for him to get an education. It's his merit that he used the opportunities his parents gave him, but without those opportunities . bad luck.
I don't see contradictions at all. All parents are supposed to work for the benefice of their children, if they brought children to this world in first place; the path is a single one. But it's up to you to use what you are given, either being rich or poor. We are not something 'detached' from all else, and when someone usually says they earned their place, at least around here, that means our story, people involved in it. So, no contradicions, the man implied that, such as those complaining about their lives mean their path as well. Perhaps it was lost in my sense of taking for granted things we say here to try and translate.
I also don't understand the next stuff being spoken. I was giving a comparison between two completely different people, one that has never worked complaining that the other has too much money because he worked instead of just complaining and blaming others, and the one that has never worked (who came from where parents also worked, much 'better berth' per se), but he didn't use the given opportunity they created for him. I don't understand where you started to come bringing that specific fault conversation, either. I don't think I mentioned parents faults anywhere. I merely spoke of people blaming their own difficulties upon others, unrelated, unknowingly, as if you are forced to be responsible for everyone else's decisions.
Now, if he didn't have those opportunities, who knows? A lot of people with 'bad parenting', or other really difficult position while being raised, come to many results; lack of education being mainly the most problematic point around here, but I have friends that came from 'nowhere' with a lot of effort (and of course, help of other people with similar drive) and I have acquaitances that got acommodated with what they had and chose a harder life instead – for their own reasons – but they complain a lot about their lives and their current situation and blame others that chose to move on. To me, that does not make sense. Some even had a very high educational basis. What happens, at least here, is that when people are being given things too freely and loosely, they stop working for it or get the notion that it's a given or their right to be in that situation and not to go beyond, or learn better. Coincidently or not, they have completely opposite political positions. As I said, this country has been ruled by left party since before I was born. That sort of culture is here everywhere and some people only know that reality. But those who get educated in a less partial way, with broader, tend to change their lives by going out of their cocoon.
One thing comes instantly into my mind when this subject arises. Brazil has a public health system. It's quite decent at some regions, whilst in others not that much ('tis a system which is heavily affected by corruption, because it's one that's not going down, so it's always a source of money for some). Its effectiveness is basically the reflection of the regions themselves, but it covers almost everything one needs. There is a waiting line for some procedures and it might take time for a person to be attended, some even die waiting. Still, there it is. Some basic services might not be good because of bad public administration, or fed up public workers; some are really lazy and don't do anything to change that themselves, and, as usual, they blame someone else, to an extent at to make all public workers be demonized as lazy or actually willingly to attend and serve the public. A lot of people complain about the health system, but at least they have one. I used it when I was very little, for my bronchitis crisis, but after that, my parents, and now me, can afford a faster way to be attended with my, uh, the term for it ... Health Security? Mine is called Unimed. It covers a lot of procedures and I pay half of a fixed amount for most of them, whilst my company pays the other half. Returning to the public system (which is called SUS here): Politicians love to use that system to boast their agenda. But they never used it. Ex-president Lula fawns over it. But whenever he had any small issue, he would go (and we all were paying for that) to the most expensive hospitals.
However, one thing that SUS is quite good at and competent with is by communicating with people. Everyone knows the basic things here (even the native populations deep in Amazon, they get base information about public health, things to prevent this and that, etc.). You can access a lot of medications for free at some places, some have discounts, free samples or else. And everyone can go to a public health center, even small ones, and fetch condoms. That's completely free. They have 2 types, for youngsters and adults. I could say that 95% of Brazilian population knows what a condom is, how to use it, and what for. Everyone in this country is already paying taxes to maintain SUS, which either right and left wings aknowledge its potential and importance, and no one wants it gone. However, for some reason, the poor population from urban sprawls and slums don't apply the basic health information they were given and keep having babies in very difficult situations. You see a lot of families with 5 or 6 children, complaining about a problem with a local administration, living just around the corner of a Health Center, still, decided not to be responsible enough to avoid bringing a child to this world into their hardship, going through deprivations, hunger, violence (which starts surmounting once their reality at those places take root) and God only knows what else. The very young making children without any sort of way to sustain them. Should I be blamed and forced to support those families? I really don't conccur to that. Those same families, the poor ones that is, are given a basic financial support by the government, and there's an addition value for each children you have. That aid is one of the main victories of the last government. It's called Bolsa Família. It's a very costy system as well, and a lot of people apply that Jeitinho Brasileiro to exploit it. It's a small value, but it helps the most in need. But it does not solve the problem. The government bolstered it as if it was the solution of poverty, whilst in fact it just made people tied to it. People are still poor, there were not real and meaningful investment to help them get better lives, work. And a lot of people is accomodated by that, sadly. By a lot, I don't mean the majority, but it's a great number of people, millions, most likely. The toll over the population is high. When Bolsonaro was running for office, left wing kept saying he would end up with Bolsa Família, that the poor would become poorer, etc. Of course, such election strategies are played by both sides, speculation, playing with words. Bolsa Família was never a target, but the problem that makes Bolsa Família a huge necessity is something that's being targeted now, which makes it something the opposition does not want to have it done. Bolsa Família is more largely used in the Northeast, as I explained in the other post it's the regions with most people in dire need of it, and it's where Bolsonaro is focusing to give people means to work and be detached from that system. And if people there are given help, proper help, they'll work for a better life. So, you see, we have some public systems here with good intentions, not really refined, but they do their job. But a lot of people are in the way they are now because they chose too, especially these ones with a lot of kids when they knew better how to avoid that situation in first place, and then, they find it cute when their children follow in their steps, sexualizing the very young with songs and local culture, knowning full well what that did to them. Still, there they are. Are we to blame for that too? I don't think so. But we all pay for that anyway. And still, they complain about their situation and blame others for that. You don't know how jarring it is even to talk about it. Germany is already in a state of decreasing population over the years, if I am not mistaken. Projections around the globe show poor countries going into exploding overpopulation, meaning a lot of famine and social issues. But countries such as mine have conditions to help people avoid such growth. It rests upon population itself most of the responsibilities on that regard, because here, people do know what to do. However, that will not be possible in many other countries, such as Bangladesh for example.
Regarding taxes, I fail to see the point in your post. Here we have, I believe, 3 or 4 tier of taxes depending on how much you earn. If you have a salary below a certain threshold, you are free of a direct tax upon your income, but you still spend at least half of your salary on taxes anywhere else, considering we have a lot of taxes upon a lot of different 'services' and on all products. And all pay for those, the rich and the poor besides. Also, here in Brazil, we have 40% of the working population with informal jobs, which means you get some money not really registered and you might actually evade fiscal taxes; but you also have a lot of employment rights off the books too, which might be really bad in the long term (another public system we have is the public social security, another value on your earnings, compulsory; that's one huge economic problem here); however, as the amount of problems, taxes and lack of incentive for employers are added one upon the other for formal employment, informal employment took roots (and both sides are responsible, of course, offer and demand). It is extremly costy to employ people here formally and adding higher taxes upon that won't make things better, and having an actual 13% of unemployed worsened by the pandemic, informality starts to look like the only way for both sides to profit. Given public services have a very bad reputation with corruption and also because some are really bad administrated, there's a considerable part of the A-C wealth population evading taxes upon their income directly, largely more than rich or millionaire part even. Might not be a match in brute monetary values, that I would not know, but the population is largely at fault. Those who choose to follow the rules cannot be held responsible for that, and part of the social problems in my country are caused by population itself, from poor to rich citizen, denying, misusing and not doing their duties for society, then blaming others for that. Most people, and that's visible everywhere here – not something I made up now, who complain and say rich people should pay more taxes than they currently do are the same ones who are evading taxes in the first place – from any wealth even, as long as they are not affected by these new taxes. They are also the ones who call on corruption and complain about the government, but they are daily corrupting something themselves, or not simply following some rules to help society in a sense, 'little things', but etched in our culture in a way that it even has a name: Jeitinho Brasileiro. It encompasses since the harmless clever solutions for a small problem, to means to be 'smart' and make fool of others. Which includes falling themselves into believing they are different from the corrupt they like to talk about, whilst not being able to emulate a proper conduct about the simplest things in their own lives to improve it; so what to think of people who cannot abide by even the simplest rules? They choose to be like that; they're part of the problem. And I really don't see a reason at any level or point, why someone should be blamed or responsible for others like that, for the fate they have sown and chose to follow, and that reflects heavily on how it affects their perception upon what's fair when taxing different tiers of wealth in my country. In my country, and apparently in the neighboring ones as well, that sort of taxing does not work and won't work, because the main real problem is somewhere else, and people who have chosen not to follow in blindly our own culture and indocrinated educational system can see that, and that's why the country is in turmoil. Education seems not convenient to some leeching political agenda, and that needs to end.
This is all a cascade. If taxes weren't so often misused or the country didn't have such scale of corruption in the public systems, population would probably be less evasive about paying taxes, a larger number would collaborate as they should, public systems would be healthier, the country would be relatively different, because people would have a different level of morality and culture. More importantly, we would have less people depending on the state to survive and a state that would be less proud of boasting their population are depending on assistance to live, because that's actually not a good thing. Providing help is one thing. Making it a rule and disguise it as necessary is another completely different. And worse is making population believe that's the way into the future.
This country has things that work in the point of view of right, left and center wings. They are proved to work. But they have room or need to be optimized, and it's just possible if population is aware of them, of their strengths and weaknesses and not be blind about it. People would need to get into a new level of education and culture, try to make good use of what's given/offered/proposed/provided/presented to them and do not blame others, if they choose poorly – which is what I was trying to explain on the other post.
Well, enough of this subject now. I actually have to work and not dilly-dally here.
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS – Portal 2
|
| |
|
|
