japan77

I would like to propose a complete overhaul to the system to prepare us for the 21st century. Note: Current minimum wage at 40 hour work weeks for 52 weeks results in: 15k, 100% FPL for a single is 12k.

1st. Removal of any subsidies/tax breaks/ pro-monopoly laws, unless the companies happen to be producing something with a positive externality.

2nd. Provide a Universal income that evaluates to basically the minimum necessary to survive (100% FPL)

3rd. To save the environment, and not fuck over the next generation, create a graduated carbon tax, this would punish companies that do more polluting more severely.

4th. To promote education, provide an income for people staying in school(400% FPL?), and make college payments on an affordability basis(something like a graduated tax system)

5th. Creation of anti-monopoly laws, worker's unions, universal health care, requirements for vacation(Something like a minimum of x days off), paternity leave, gender equality law enforcement(80% earnings nation-wide, which can't be explained away by occupation, education, career decisions, etc.), Racial equality policies.

6th. Leave wages to the market, as we've ensured that those who do work will exceed the poverty line, and have policies to remove discrimination, which could break markets.

My general point of view on this is yes, but only due to 3 factors. 1. Our models/artificial testing devices are currently pretty trash, so we really can't replace these test subjects. 2. Most of these lab animals were in fact bred for this purpose, and letting them back into the wild or putting them in zoos would create massive overpopulation of certain species of animals. 3. This boils down to basically a better them than us argument, but in all honesty, if I had to choose between killing an animal or killing a human to develop a cure, I'm killing the animal every single time.

Vietnam under Ho Chin Minh wasn't a majorly supportive ally of China, it was more of a yugoslavia situation. Yet we sent troops into vietnam, but not yugoslavia. In all honesty, vietnam probably would've been more of a neutral state in the war if the US hadn't decided to continue the war the French had been fighting.

Depends on Point of view.

For France, it was totally justified, as they could get no confirmations from the US or the UK that they would be protected the next time Germany invaded(people need to remember that Germany also attacked France in the 1870s).

From any other standpoint, the treaty does seem quite unreasonable.

I never stated they were comparable. I just disagree with the fact that the US members got off scot free, and to add injury to insult, there were no confirmed cases of Japanese spies, and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team was the most successful unit in US history, and consisted of purely Japanese-American soldiers, and the US refused to acknowledge that it was in fact a bad action until Clinton, and even then the payments awarded were significantly less than the property loss that the Japanese-Americans suffered due to the interment camps. Whereas there were confirmed cases of Italian and German spies living in the US, and yet there were no internment camps for them. There is also the issue that the fact that the US even conducted this is barely acknowledge in American History textbooks (it got a paragraph in my APUSH textbook). 

Torture doesn't work, as the military, CIA, etc have admitted to multiple times, literally look up any article on waterboarding. As woot pointed out, demanding a passcode may be a usable situation, but in all honesty, there are much easier ways to crack into a computer and steal the information than torturing a guy who is going to give a bunch of false passcodes. Also, if they are even remotely intelligent, they'll have it set up so it wipes after x number of tries, so the torture method here also fails.

I think the basic concept was justified, as trying people regarding war crimes makes sense. I disagree with the fact that the nuremberg trials were just limited to the Nazis, as they weren't the only ones with internment camps(the US had them too). I feel that everyone who committed or could be accused of committing a war crime should have been tried. I also believe the punishments handed out were not okay, as they involved the death penalty, and as a person opposed to capital punishment on the grounds of you can't bring back someone who is dead. As such, I believe the Nuremberg trials are only partially justifiable.

On 2/4/2017 at 8:48 AM, Rin said:

I don't think IC's trophy rack is big enough to win an award every week. Maybe monthly is better.

lol true

Fish( A bunch of guppies that I've had since 3rd grade)

2x dogs

Don't really have finals, Instead I get to take 6 AP tests and 7 IB tests(4 HL, 3SL)...kill me now, I don't wanna start reviewing.

Guy can be seen as a nationalist hero for the vietnamese, he got them rule with limited outside influence. Technically Vietnam was a client state of China, but China's influence was extremely limited. However at the same time, like EP pointed out his adherence to communist doctrine trashed the vietnamese economy and lead to starvation while other countries around him had economic success. As such, I would view him as neither a hero or villain, but rather a combination of both.

Because I'm a bit messed up in the head and enjoy watching everything go to hell.

Honestly, if I got paid a reasonable amount for giving up my seat, I would be okay with it. The issue is that when you get forcibly removed, they barely give you anything useful.

This one.

At the very least, having a higher court system, so the situation is more like a federation of global states could be useful, thus we aren't dealing with sovereigns.

She could make it to the second round, but I doubt she would win, as she's too extreme right for the center to go to her.

In all honesty, I see 4 contenders atm (GSW, Spurs, Houston, Cavs)

People like to deny science for some weird reason.

It's very simple. Insurance companies are worried about their profit margins, not people's health, and as such they charge excessively. To add on to that, the fed doesn't subsidize medical schools, so University Hospitals charge excessively to keep themselves functioning.

To continue the line of French jokes,

Have you seen their war flag?

My non-art is superior to all you art.

Going to a top school, and my parents make too much to get any kind of need based aid, sort of like how there is a medicare and obamacare gap, there's a gap of people who "Make too much" to get any financial aid, but not enough to the point that it's a drop in the bucket. While I did get some merit, it's still going 50k a year, which is still pretty excessive. It just happens that the kind of school I am looking for( small class sizes, good CS programs, good math programs) tends to be private schools that would cost 70k with no scholarships.

There are no winners in war.

War doesn't determine who is right, just who is left.

Definitely should be cheaper, 70k a year is not an affordable price. I am in favor of making tuition free, as you can basically not get any good paying job without a degree (Think Olin College of Engineering set up in every college in the US).

Is this a spam thread?