StarGateWars Forums

In politics, you never get what you vote for.

I will never vote for anyone in my country, unless an individual is truly horrible that I just have to vote against him.

I doubt any President will ever be amazing in the United States until he takes a stand on what he believes to be right for his people, rather than the public opinion of him or image.

"A bunch of idiots annoying people and accomplishing nothing"

Maybe that's too long.

My biggest problem with Occupy is the number of people squatting in public parks, marching without permits, and bringing the crime along with them. I have nothing against their movement or message, but the crime rates are up 14% in the area Occupy is well...occupying.

From an outsider point of view, it seem to be demonstrations with slogans, but do they really have a "program" to propose?
Not to mention such movements always attract troublemakers taking opportunity to cause troubles.

Noobert wrote:In politics, you never get what you vote for.

I will never vote for anyone in my country, unless an individual is truly horrible that I just have to vote against him.

So you let others choose for you hehe.

I like it.

Not sure the media keeps trying to turn me against it, but I really like the concept of it.

LordApophisOne wrote:"A bunch of idiots annoying people and accomplishing nothing"

Maybe that's too long.

agree.

then, there's this:


wealth distribution is a power law. for every man with wealth of X there are about 4.6 ppl with 0.5X. it's a simple fact of nature. generally the wealthier the society the bigger the difference between the richest and the poorest. and if you want equality and redistribution then sorry, everybody will end up piss-poor like a church mouse (yes, we've tried this and that's how it ended. vide: ussr, north korea, cuba etc.)
so occupying wall street makes as much sense as occupying the weather station because you don't like the weather.

I hope I won't have to step over them when I go to the opera.

Corran Horne wrote:

LordApophisOne wrote:"A bunch of idiots annoying people and accomplishing nothing"

Maybe that's too long.

agree.

then, there's this:


wealth distribution is a power law. for every man with wealth of X there are about 4.6 ppl with 0.5X. it's a simple fact of nature. generally the wealthier the society the bigger the difference between the richest and the poorest. and if you want equality and redistribution then sorry, everybody will end up piss-poor like a church mouse (yes, we've tried this and that's how it ended. vide: ussr, north korea, cuba etc.)
so occupying wall street makes as much sense as occupying the weather station because you don't like the weather.

I'm not in favor of equality but equity (those who deserve by proving they deserve, receive). I mean, if someone studied long enough from a not-so wealthy background and proved to have some worth considering skills, they should have opportunity to have a chance to get on the higher part of the income groups by working among said groups. I agree these people aren't the majority, but it's especially because they aren't the majority that it should be possible. And because I am personally concerned lol.

On the other hand, I am against the foolish idea about trying to give an unqualified worker the same/close to same salary as a qualified manager, a lawyer or a doctor.
Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining and not doing work like...I don't know, the CEO from an industrial firm.

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

Corran Horne wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

I'm not turning it into a rugby vs football argument, I'm just saying any sport where sport players are paid too much (I'd say anything above £20k~€25k/month) should be paid less.

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Corran Horne wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

I'm not turning it into a rugby vs football argument, I'm just saying any sport where sport players are paid too much (I'd say anything above £20k~€25k/month) should be paid less.

So Eto'o being paid $560,000 a week is too much?

RepliMagni wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Corran Horne wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

I'm not turning it into a rugby vs football argument, I'm just saying any sport where sport players are paid too much (I'd say anything above £20k~€25k/month) should be paid less.

So Eto'o being paid $560,000 a week is too much?

Of course!
I love football, but I think this decade's utter inflation on transfers/salaries is ruining it.
As if he couldn't survive with $360,000...a year.

They are annoying. That is all.

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Corran Horne wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

I'm not turning it into a rugby vs football argument, I'm just saying any sport where sport players are paid too much (I'd say anything above £20k~€25k/month) should be paid less.

They are paid what they deserve. They are entertainers and bring in a lot of revenue for their leagues, it is only fair that they get a slice of that pie.

Psyko wrote:My biggest problem with Occupy is the number of people squatting in public parks, marching without permits, and bringing the crime along with them. I have nothing against their movement or message, but the crime rates are up 14% in the area Occupy is well...occupying.

Permits should not be required for demonstrations, par the constitution. As for the crime, the good can not control what the bad do and should not be punished for it.

The answer to rising crime? Arm yourself.

Legendary Apophis wrote:

RepliMagni wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Corran Horne wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Still that I find the salaries from some sports' high level players to be foolishness and that they should be reduced because they are just entertaining...

exactly!!! all footballers' (soccer players') wages should be 0.00!!!

I'm not turning it into a rugby vs football argument, I'm just saying any sport where sport players are paid too much (I'd say anything above £20k~€25k/month) should be paid less.

So Eto'o being paid $560,000 a week is too much?

Of course!
I love football, but I think this decade's utter inflation on transfers/salaries is ruining it.
As if he couldn't survive with $360,000...a year.

An expansion on Jack's post but: Hugh Laurie gets paid $700'000 an episode of House and that show airs weekly except for breaks between seasons. Footballers wages are only complained about because they get such high media attention, they're only beginning to approach the stupid amounts of money actors get paid for tv series or movies.

It's the entertainment business and people are willing to pay to be entertained.