Interesting viewpoint...

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Got this in an e-mail today...




Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. What happens to the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.

They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
 

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
You forgot the part where the rich guy has to pay for their healthcare, food, rent subsidies, lunches for the kids in school, and their PD when they go to court for beating him up...
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled
it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it is, as I filled it
lovingly with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds
taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily
accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards
of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.
Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile,
the chairs, the table ... everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would
dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had
fed them out of my own pocket.

And others birds were boisterous and loud. They
sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at
all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it
when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch
anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days
the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down
the many nests they had built all over the patio.

Soon, the back yard was like it used to be ... quiet, serene
and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.


Now let's see ....

Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing,
free medical care, and free education and allows anyone
born here to be an automatic citizen.


Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly
our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments
are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen
by an emergency room doctor; your child's 2nd grade class is
behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak
English.

Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to
"press one" to hear my bank talk to me in English, and
people waving flags other than "Old Glory" are
squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding
more rights and free liberties.



Maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder.
 

A.B.Normal

New Member
Birds ,homeless its the same.
http://www.canada.com/ch/cheknews/news/story.html?id=535e238d-cbd9-4930-a30b-0dfce7c54f31&k=67026

Protesters target ban on camping

Richard Watts
Times Colonist

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

About 30 people, most of them ragged looking, gathered on the steps of the Victoria courthouse yesterday to highlight their legal fight on behalf of homeless people.

Chief among their complaints was the more than two-year delay in getting to their legal challenge, citing the Charter of Rights, to the Victoria city bylaw prohibiting outdoor camping.

"We're saying 'We've had enough,' " said Victoria anti-poverty activist Rose Henry.

The lawsuit against the city's no-camping bylaw was launched in 2005 after a number of people were arrested after erecting tents in Cridge Park, at the corner of Blanshard and Belleville streets.

The people who pitched those tents were inspired by the actions of David Johnston. A baker by trade but homeless by conviction, Johnston has been arrested repeatedly, and even jailed, for his refusal to stop camping on public parkland.


Catherine Boies Parker, one of two lawyers representing the homeless people in their court challenge, said in a telephone interview the argument is a strong one in favour of the homeless people's rights.

Boies Parker said the suit will show the city's no-camping bylaw, by forbidding people from erecting even rudimentary shelter, interferes with homeless people's security of person, a right guaranteed under the charter.

"We have a really strong case," said Boies Parker.

But getting that argument heard by a judge has been tough. The city attempted to get the case dismissed. It was unsuccessful but it still took court time.

And now the provincial government has stepped into the case (the province is routinely informed of all charter arguments) and has also prepared its own motion.

The province will ask the court to strike out the charter argument contending it has no merit.

The provincial government's motion will be heard next month. The trial date for the homeless charter case, meanwhile, is scheduled to begin June 16 and last five days.

© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2008


A baker by trade but homeless by conviction. :rolleyes:
 

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
Isn't that a treatable conviction?

:horse: is what it is. He can get a job in a bakery before dark. He wants to play the victim role for awhile. Milk the system, play on sympathies like this reporter fed into. Get off your ass and get a job already.
 

A.B.Normal

New Member
He is a Baker ,means he has a job,his conviction is he doesn't want to spend $$$ on housing and instead camps on public property.

This story is also appropriate to jimpeels thread about,government owning land,If the rich bitch can cut trees why shouldn't the homeless be able to camp on it .
 
Top