Not tax, actually inheritance.
Making property worthless, since it cannot be transferred.
Sorry, excuse me, you’d need a brain to think of that.
Why wait until they’re dead to steal their life savings? Why not make saving illegal?
After all, keeping your earnings is selfish, what are you going to do with that money?
Ban compound interest, it causes inequality.
If only the State owns property, the People have nothing and will give up their labours in short order. Cattle think the grass belongs to them.
Picture the psychology of these people.
This is where ‘wealth tax’ always leads – you have more, I can steal it, because I don’t have it.
They hate nationalism but they love nationalizing on behalf of the Queen’s property portfolio – except council tax means you don’t actually own freehold. It’s a license to pay further tax (after income, VAT, state admin, legal fees, stamp duty etc).
In other words, encourage people NOT to save for retirement, for the future, because anything you don’t spend will be stolen (confiscated, if you wish to be polite) by the state to subsidize those who do not save, or plan ahead.
They already do.
There’s no rationale for inheritance tax.
You’re taxed for dying.
It was a recent change and intended to be temporary.
Now the Government is a 40% stakeholder in all profits you make but no debts.
It’s fucking rigged.
Keynesians want to destroy a house to create jobs to build another.
They’re the four economic horsemen of a real Depression.
this economic illiterate should be shot, or at least laughed out of the room
Economics is by no means my main gig and I see this plain as the egg on this bitch’s face, I’m ashamed to share a sex with this vapid ditz.
best short comment
Funny how the Guardian socialist readership suddenly become all right wing when faced with the prospect of losing their inheritances. Tax the *other* rich!
This authoritarianism is why the People always killed the Communists.
Equality is evil. Behaviourism proves why Communism will never work. Hell, just the Marshmallow test! Same opportunities, differing outcomes! THE NASH EQUILIBRIUM.
Now, all of these in fact have been the economic effects of pursuing far too much equality, and I think we have very much now come to the end of the road. And, in fact, we find that the persistent expansion of the role of the state, beyond the capacity of the economy to support it, and the relentless pursuit of equality has caused, and is causing, damage to our economy in a variety of ways. It’s not the sole cause of what some have termed the ‘British sickness’ but it is a major one.
Now, what are the lessons then that we’ve learned from the last thirty years? First, that the pursuit of equality itself is a mirage. What’s more desireable and more practicable than the pursuit of equality is the pursuit of equality of opportunity. And opportunity means nothing unless it includes the right to be unequal and the freedom to be different.
One of the reasons that we value individuals is not because they’re all the same, but because they’re all different. I believe you have a saying in the Middle West: ‘Don’t cut down the tall poppies. Let them rather grow tall.’ I would say, let our children grow tall and some taller than others if they have the ability in them to do so. Because we must build a society in which each citizen can develop his full potential, both for his own benefit and for the community as a whole, a society in which originality, skill, energy and thrift are rewarded, in which we encourage rather than restrict the variety and richness of human nature.
Read Genius Famine.
n.b. The problem of obedience in schools also applies to the military.
Now, holding these views as strongly as I do, you can imagine that I was particularly interested to read a description of some of the problems in Czechoslovakia. And the description went like this—and I’ll tell you the year to which it referred in a moment. ‘The pursuit of equality’—I’m quoting—‘has developed in and unprecedented manner [end p147] and this fact has become one of the most important obstacles to intensive economic development and higher living standards. The negative aspects of equality are that lazy people, passive individuals, and irresponsible employees profit at the expense of dedicated and diligent employees, that unskilled workers profit at the expense of skilled ones, that those who are backward from the viewpoint of technology profit at the expense of those with initiative and talent.’
The problem isn’t women, even the ditzy ones. It’s a systemic issue.
You see the same moral weakness in all-boys schools, for instance.
Look at the facial expression in the Bible quote. That’s an atheist going to Hell for blasphemy.
Spliced with photo of actual ‘refugees’. A picture is worth a thousand words.
Hopefully the Manchester attack, nail-bombing little girls has redpilled these feminists.
Somehow I doubt it. This is the one that started it all.
This one in particular triggers me, the way to kill it is with apathy: So?
So was Jack the Ripper, so was Hitler, so is Trump. Tired of whataboutism.
“they are us, we are them”
Meanwhile, actual refugees
Yeah, let’s not save these people waving round the white flag of Christendom.
Are they welcome in YOUR home? Why not?
JK Rowling has yet to take in any ‘refugees’ that someone offered to pay to fly to her homes!
She is irrelevant. Like…
Emma Watson hasn’t spent a night in the Calais camp alone, without security.
Locks are racist! No borders? No walls! Let’s all live in pagodas!
Now a series of triggering memes and funnies.
It’s been a while. 120 funnies. Some repeats. A few serious.
about as real as her hair
Going by her Coco the Clown makeup, I think they do.
The People do not consent to open borders. The native people.
Everyone into Lord of the Rings.
All harassment is bad but sexual harassment is the worst.
It’s the First World, fucking act like it.
Recently, a German woman was beaten by a ‘migrant’, because she told him not to call her a bitch.
Tesla’s expression, my fucking sides.
He never said that but yes. Fitness is in adaptation.
Just like consciousness. You can’t touch it or test it. It’s unfalsifiable. It’s the scientific concept of spirit.
It isn’t scientific though.
Sexual orientation theory is BS. There’s only behaviour – which hole is your goal?
The alt-lite treats the J-word as their N.
And strange brown men on the street.
The temporary alliance of SJWs and Muslims is simple: the sexually entitled support the sexually entitled.
Also take down White Man but obviously, SJWs aren’t white or men, typically.
Why embrace equality, when it’s really misanthropy beneath?
Throw away the key. It must have been horrific.
I post these stories to prove that 1. there are terrible White people and I don’t stick up for these tarts, 2. the law is equally applied for these crimes but owing to 3. the numbers of one sex committing a crime (perps) are skewed, you rarely see it. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, there is justice on sexual crime and we can’t be silent. I may fit into the same category as these white women but I’m not about to defend their actions like feminists, SJWs and MRAs or MGTOWs would suggest. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong, whoever does it.
Standards apply to everyone. This is the First World and we need to act like it.
But you should hate yourself, your non-existent identity and abandon the Civilization that doesn’t exist.
If we’re all equal, how does anyone get to guilt-trip?
Why don’t we leave Africa to starve and the Middle East to kill itself, since they can obviously just adopt liberalism that’s been so favourable for Western demographics?
Cultural Marxists are secular missionaries, bringing ruin and slow suicide in exchange for hedonism, wherever they go. SJW entryism. Reminds me of dancing mania, one long mass hysteria, a huge party, until everybody dies.
Self-proclaimed philosophers are scientists without the proof. Excuses are not proof.
Often they oppose evidence because it restricts them. That isn’t a joke. I asked.
Culture isn’t a box to check on the questionnaire of humanity, it is a process you join, a life lived with others.
I’m so triggered.
It’s genetic. HBD. The people make the culture.
Appiah also argues against the idea of culture as an essence or a birthright. This is similar to the arguments he made about religion, nationalism and race in his earlier lectures: none of these provide the essence of a fixed identity.
They’re more fixed than whatever crony the BBC is paying to push We’re all the Same but Diversity is Strength.
Culture and cultural values are not inherited generation-to-generation.
Outright blatant lie.
Our tax money is paying for this CM BS.
Culture and values are choices to be made actively, not “tracks laid down by a Western destiny”.
To some extent this is true. But is this too individualistic a way of looking at the world?
There is literally a contradiction. There is no truth relativism.
There is clear historically provable destiny. Given X, people Y will Z.
Cultures apply to individuals, yes. Families specifically. Genetic kin.
It might be very difficult for someone living in an illiberal society to choose to put liberal democratic values into practice even if they feel a strong affinity with them.
Someone’s behind on the neuroscience of race. Genes.
Appiah’s view of Western culture as a set of values that can be embraced by anyone might offer little comfort.
Others have tried and failed e.g. Asia tries to be creative and scientific as NW Europe. Instead they rip us off in Shenzen and have huge academic fraud cases among their brightest.
No, they cannot. The culture is hegemonic. I cannot go to a Muslim culture and dance in the street.
Cultures are NOT values. And values are opposed.
This man has no idea what he’s talking about and how dare he try to speak for white European peoples.
He’s just a cultural theorist, that doesn’t excuse appropriation.
If whites can’t speak for the Black experience in America, he can’t talk down to the English in their ancestral homeland.
The difference between a cult and a culture is these people running it.
He has no data. It’s all his bloody opinion. How dare he.