Does anyone on this forum consider themself as being " woke "

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reality|Bites said:
We all have opinions but we all know that talking about that one will end badly soo...
Click to expand...
Seems you just got to do what you're told, when certain people are doing the telling...

"This is a time when we can't stay quiet, we need to stand up and let them know, the head teacher, the school and the governing body, that this is not something light. There's a line you can't cross," he said.
Click to expand...
I'm glad we're letting people like that dictate to the rest of us what we can and can't say, can and can't teach, can and can't look at.

To me, that's "crossing a line" as well..

Love how they also go straight to the massed protests outside the school, and yet none of them were ever in any danger of being arrested for Covid violations. Completely immune.
 
57341696.jpg
 
A good friend of mine is mostly liberal and I'm mostly libertarian.

One of the things that allows us to have useful conversations/disagreements is that we are both aware of, and honest about, our leanings.
 
Reality|Bites said:
what's the difference and what do you talk about?
Click to expand...

Most recent was a discussion of how locus of control could be the most important factor in determining political leanings.

People with an internal locus of control want freedom where people with an external locus of control want security. I think we generally agreed on that one though.

Most recent disagreement was probably taxation and what "fair" means in that context.

I think people should all be taxed equally and he thinks rich people should be taxed decidedly unequally. (He's wealthy too) I managed to present a tax plan that addressed all his objections to "flat" taxation : A national sales tax with a "pre-bate" check sent to every man woman and child (the parents) for the tax on whatever amount of income the collective deems to be "needed" and then we all pay the same sales tax on everything we buy throughout the year. He acknowledged that all his objections had been dealt with, but still said he thought the rich should have to pay more....basically just because.

For his part, he has been persuasive with me in making the case for the general concept of "safety nets" in society....but the devil is always in the details.
 
Johno please? said:
On this topic of wokeness and cancel culture.... always something to wind up a muslim.

Nice to see the law regarding covid is being fairly implemented aswell xD

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-56524850
Click to expand...

That does seem pretty insensitive though. Out of context at least it's not exactly a secret that images of the prophet are offensive in islam, which is what the school should be teaching (i mean the aim is for the kids to understand muslim beleifs and customs).

There are valid reasons to display some contraversial material, especially for educational purposes but i cant see what reason there would be to display such an image when the lesson of "displaying images of the prophet is offensive" can be acheived without displaying an image.
 
Twinz said:
I think people should all be taxed equally and he thinks rich people should be taxed decidedly unequally. (He's wealthy too) I managed to present a tax plan that addressed all his objections to "flat" taxation : A national sales tax with a "pre-bate" check sent to every man woman and child (the parents) for the tax on whatever amount of income the collective deems to be "needed" and then we all pay the same sales tax on everything we buy throughout the year. He acknowledged that all his objections had been dealt with, but still said he thought the rich should have to pay more....basically just because.

For his part, he has been persuasive with me in making the case for the general concept of "safety nets" in society....but the devil is always in the details.
Click to expand...
In fairly simplistic terms, flat tax does sound inherently "fair", tbh. But how would you address the shortfall in tax revenue compared to today?

I don't think you could set universal tax rate at 50% without crippling the low-paid or needing to give them substantial rebates (making it no longer a flat tax anyhow).

At the other extreme, if you set it at 20% you'd lose tons of tax revenue, and services would need to be cut dramatically.

So although it's arguably more "fair", I'm not sure how you'd begin to balance the books.

e: I should also say that it's only "fair" at all with zero loopholes. As we all know, accountants and tax havens benefit the wealthy, not the poor.

So there would have to be zero-tolerance for those who avoid tax, let alone those who evade it ;) If you want fair, we must all play by the same rules. No avoidance for anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom