03-25-2021, 01:36 PM
|
#1581
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: east van
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate
I don’t feel like reading the opinion, but I can’t help but think that it goes against the holdings of Heller and McDonald.
As in, how can you have the individual right to keep and bear arms for a traditionally lawful purpose, but not “carry” them?
|
As open carry has a long history of being regulated and the 2nd amendment makes no mention of it all the court has really done is maintain the legal status quo, states have the right to allow or disallow their morons to wander around with guns
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 08:13 AM
|
#1583
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
|
Atheism is the largest growing "faith" in America. I cannot wait until there are enough elected officials to do away with dumb #### like "In God We Trust" and any other relic from the 1700's.
America is not a theocracy, and therefore, someone's faith should never be used to justify legislation. Expression of religion? Fine. Go for it. Having it dictate policy? Horrific, and there are countless historical examples and current ones to suggest that it only leads to more problems in any society for those that aren't "true believers".
Get that #### out of here.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
|
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 08:25 AM
|
#1584
|
addition by subtraction
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
Atheism is the largest growing "faith" in America. I cannot wait until there are enough elected officials to do away with dumb #### like "In God We Trust" and any other relic from the 1700's.
America is not a theocracy, and therefore, someone's faith should never be used to justify legislation. Expression of religion? Fine. Go for it. Having it dictate policy? Horrific, and there are countless historical examples and current ones to suggest that it only leads to more problems in any society for those that aren't "true believers".
Get that #### out of here.
|
Just a reminder that much of the religious content in government was a product of the 1950's and trying to stave off communism. Evangelicals have worked hard the last half century trying to turn America into gods chosen country. I too look forward to a day when the tide has turned.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
This individual is not affluent and more of a member of that shrinking middle class. It is likely the individual does not have a high paying job, is limited on benefits, and has to make due with those benefits provided by employer.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dobbles For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 08:51 AM
|
#1585
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
Atheism is the largest growing "faith" in America. I cannot wait until there are enough elected officials to do away with dumb #### like "In God We Trust" and any other relic from the 1700's.
|
Not gonna happen in your lifetime. Atheism might grow from 10 per cent of the population to 30 per cent over the next 50 years. Eight in ten 18-29 year olds believe in some kind of spiritual force or higher power.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...belief-in-god/
Given the demographic makeup of the religiously faithful, you’re going to be waiting a long, long time before even the Democrats nominate an openly irreligious presidential candidate. Religion helps explain why Bernie Sanders has a ceiling of about 30 per cent in the party and gets zero traction with Black voters.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...ite-democrats/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...oly-scripture/
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 12:50 PM
|
#1586
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Victoria
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:11 PM
|
#1587
|
NOT breaking news
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary
|
User pays approach. What is he, Republican? Someone should ask him if he thinks Healthcare should be user paid as well.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:15 PM
|
#1588
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
User pays approach. What is he, Republican? Someone should ask him if he thinks Healthcare should be user paid as well.
|
I think there are some good arguments to be made for user pay on roads. At some point it needs to be figured out, anyway, because gas taxes are going to dry up as we switch to electric.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:21 PM
|
#1589
|
NOT breaking news
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I think there are some good arguments to be made for user pay on roads. At some point it needs to be figured out, anyway, because gas taxes are going to dry up as we switch to electric.
|
Sure, but that's a right-wing argument. If Mayor Pete is making this argument, he's in the wrong party.
[But Pete, what about major delivery and trucking corporations]
"This will be a tax on the individual doing the driving, not the entity that owns the vehicle or employs the driver."
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:36 PM
|
#1590
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
Sure, but that's a right-wing argument. If Mayor Pete is making this argument, he's in the wrong party.
[But Pete, what about major delivery and trucking corporations]
"This will be a tax on the individual doing the driving, not the entity that owns the vehicle or employs the driver."
|
What do you mean it's a "right wing argument"? Here, I'll make it liberal hippy left wing for ya.
"I live downtown in a big city and ride my bike to work. Why should I pay for roads, expensive bridges and interchanges so some acreage living pickup driving pollution spewing suburbanite can get a free ride with my tax dollars?"
There. It's not left or right, it's a society problem. Plenty of roads in socialist utopias across the pond are toll funded.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:42 PM
|
#1591
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Marseilles Of The Prairies
|
It's not a left or right problem, it's a class problem.
Any usage or consumption tax disproportionately affects lower income earners.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Settle down there, Temple Grandin.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PsYcNeT For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:44 PM
|
#1592
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
What do you mean it's a "right wing argument"? Here, I'll make it liberal hippy left wing for ya.
"I live downtown in a big city and ride my bike to work. Why should I pay for roads, expensive bridges and interchanges so some acreage living pickup driving pollution spewing suburbanite can get a free ride with my tax dollars?"
There. It's not left or right, it's a society problem. Plenty of roads in socialist utopias across the pond are toll funded.
|
It’s still a right wing argument.
The right wing argument is everyone pays for themselves for whatever they want or need.
The left wing argument is society decides what people want/need and then pays for it.
So any I don’t use it so I don’t want to pay for it is a right wing argument and any we should collectively pay for things that are of collective benefit is a left argument. There is more nuance and steps but at a very high level it kinda works.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 01:48 PM
|
#1593
|
NOT breaking news
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary
|
They tried to do something like this in Utah in the most recent legislative session. It didn't go very far.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:03 PM
|
#1594
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
It’s still a right wing argument.
The right wing argument is everyone pays for themselves for whatever they want or need.
The left wing argument is society decides what people want/need and then pays for it.
So any I don’t use it so I don’t want to pay for it is a right wing argument and any we should collectively pay for things that are of collective benefit is a left argument. There is more nuance and steps but at a very high level it kinda works.
|
Generalized, sure. But you can make issues appear right or left based on what they are and what group would support them. Like, if you had a government policy where everyone got a free gun, you'd probably have a lot of right wing support for it, and less left.
I'm just saying this issue isn't necessarily something that wouldn't be strongly supported by those more liberal cities. But then maybe hen they realize the free ride they get in their Teslas is going to end, they'd have a different opinion.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:11 PM
|
#1595
|
Ben
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
|
In fairness, he's not gonna lose any seats. He's taxing the rural poor, aka Republicans.
__________________
"Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:15 PM
|
#1596
|
wins 10 internets
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: slightly to the left
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsYcNeT
It's not a left or right problem, it's a class problem.
Any usage or consumption tax disproportionately affects lower income earners.
|
Why not make a road tax that's based on income? Make lower incomes exempt completely, and have wealthy families with multiple vehicles pay more
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:25 PM
|
#1597
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Victoria
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I think there are some good arguments to be made for user pay on roads. At some point it needs to be figured out, anyway, because gas taxes are going to dry up as we switch to electric.
|
Gas taxes are already going to disproportionately impact the poor as the rich are the ones able to afford EVs.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:41 PM
|
#1598
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
Why not make a road tax that's based on income? Make lower incomes exempt completely, and have wealthy families with multiple vehicles pay more
|
They should just roll the gas tax/road tax into a sales tax when new vehicles are purchased. This way the government collects based on new vehicle purchases whether they are gasoline, electric, hydrogen, whatever future source of fuel exists. They can structure the tax on a sliding scale so that larger vehicles and/or more expensive vehicles are taxed at a higher rate. This reduces the tax on lower incomes as they tend to be consumers of used vehicles instead of new vehicles.
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:44 PM
|
#1599
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist
They should just roll the gas tax/road tax into a sales tax when new vehicles are purchased. This way the government collects based on new vehicle purchases whether they are gasoline, electric, hydrogen, whatever future source of fuel exists. They can structure the tax on a sliding scale so that larger vehicles and/or more expensive vehicles are taxed at a higher rate. This reduces the tax on lower incomes as they tend to be consumers of used vehicles instead of new vehicles.
|
But gas taxes are currently a proxy for vehicle use, and in turn infrastructure costs. If you only drive 5000km a year, and someone else is driving 30 000km a year, you both pay the same tax? that doesn't seem right, either. It's not an easy problem to solve without km tracking, and that leads to privacy issues.
And if your vehicle gets totaled in year 3, you've payed a tax up front that is supposed to be applied to 10 or 20 years of the vehicles life?
|
|
|
03-26-2021, 02:59 PM
|
#1600
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
|
Or you could just take a tiny fraction of the bloated military budget that produces #### no modern military needs and use that to fix the infrastructure.
I should run for office.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:30 AM.
|
|