New $25 Gun Tax

[chucky2]

I have no pain other than the pain of having money forcibly taken from me under the pretense of it being used for positive societaly benefit only to then hear about it time and time again being blown either on rediculous thing, blown improperly, corruptly spent, just flat out stolen, mismanaged....well, I think you get the idea. The pain would come from what either I myself could have done with my own extra money, or, what actual good may have come from my money still going to society yet being used for something truly positive.

As far as my seeing this through just my understanding, I don't think you can imagine how true I wished that to be. That would suggest there is the Reality possiblity that just maybe, this extra theft of private money to the public trust will be used for something good for the public. This is Crook Co. It simply will not be.

If they steal $600k, spend $2M, the public will see a phantom of what it should have, the rest will be corruptly spend/diverted.

Let me try and give you an example:

Lets say there were some starving puppies in the towns common area. The town leader told her people, 'Hey, letting those puppies starve...that's just wrong. Let me and my cronies decide to steal some more tax money from you and use it to buy some meat for those poor starving puppies.' Now, pretty much all the people in the town, whether they're the ones that benefit from the corrupt town leader or who just live to fund her and her sides money grabs, understand that the town leader is completely full of shit when she says this. Yet, that desire is there to not only help the puppies (what good hearted person wouldn't?) but also, to benefit from the meat sales, the behind the scenes payoffs, etc. etc. So, finally, the town leader gets her new theft meat tax, and its reported the puppies are being fed. Months, years, decades later, it's discovered that the puppies still are starving, despite it being reported that the puppies are being fed, there being groups that get funding from public funds theft to make sure the puppies don't starve, that these groups just so happen to have ties to this town leader, that these people despite acting poor, acting like they care for the poor, live in $300k+ homes/condos/townhomes (pretty nice for Chi area), that the butcher where the meat was procured is a fraudster selling not only rotten meat but not any meat at all, that these peoples kids, family, and/or friends work for the "non-profit" making absurd amounts of money (funded by the taxpayer of course), etc. etc. etc.

When someone says, 'Yeah, no shit this happened, we've always known they're corrupt, this is just completely expected', someone comes along and says, 'Hey, I'm only regurgitating what the newspaper and this town leader said, I don't know either way. What do you base your skepticism on? Since the newspaper didn't spoon feed you some contradictory reporting, don't even question why this is a money grab, simply, don't question anything at all.'

We are now here in this thread. Do you understand now or are you still confused/trolling?

Chuck

 

[Moonbeam]

chucky2: I have no pain other than the pain of having money forcibly taken from me under the pretense of it being used for positive societaly benefit only to then hear about it time and time again being blown either on rediculous thing, blown improperly, corruptly spent, just flat out stolen, mismanaged....well, I think you get the idea. The pain would come from what either I myself could have done with my own extra money, or, what actual good may have come from my money still going to society yet being used for something truly positive.

M: That is the pain that I speak of and is the source of your anger that things are that way.

C: As far as my seeing this through just my understanding, I don't think you can imagine how true I wished that to be. That would suggest there is the Reality possiblity that just maybe, this extra theft of private money to the public trust will be used for something good for the public.

M: The alternative to just seeing though how you were conditioned is not necessarily that the world suddenly becomes rosy. Everything you see may actually be real. But because of the disgust you feel that money is taken from you and wasted or used for empty reasons causes you pain, you experience anger toward the political system around you. You believe this is a proper reaction to reality but you can't transfer it to me or other people. You suffer from what I call the impotency of rage. There is nothing you or I can do to change the minds of fools. It is resistance to this real fact, I believe, that makes us suffer. The alternate way to experience reality, in my opinion, is to surrender. To surrender is to let go and accept. You and I can do nothing. There is no guilt or anger in surrender that drives our beliefs because he who has surrendered has died and specifically to the ego, all that we believe about ourselves and reality because of our conditioning.

When you walk in the desert alone, there is only silence and infinite sky, there is only the potential, if the mind is quiet, for direct perception. There is no self telling itself a story. We have become deeply attached to things. The pain of separation from the ability to live immediately in the hear and now causes far more pain than you may be ready to admit.

C: This is Crook Co. It simply will not be.

M: It will or it won't depending on how many minds are willing to let go. You or I can only do ourselves and no one else.

C: If they steal $600k, spend $2M, the public will see a phantom of what it should have, the rest will be corruptly spend/diverted.

Let me try and give you an example:

Lets say there were some starving puppies in the towns common area. The town leader told her people, 'Hey, letting those puppies starve...that's just wrong. Let me and my cronies decide to steal some more tax money from you and use it to buy some meat for those poor starving puppies.' Now, pretty much all the people in the town, whether they're the ones that benefit from the corrupt town leader or who just live to fund her and her sides money grabs, understand that the town leader is completely full of shit when she says this. Yet, that desire is there to not only help the puppies (what good hearted person wouldn't?) but also, to benefit from the meat sales, the behind the scenes payoffs, etc. etc. So, finally, the town leader gets her new theft meat tax, and its reported the puppies are being fed. Months, years, decades later, it's discovered that the puppies still are starving, despite it being reported that the puppies are being fed, there being groups that get funding from public funds theft to make sure the puppies don't starve, that these groups just so happen to have ties to this town leader, that these people despite acting poor, acting like they care for the poor, live in $300k+ homes/condos/townhomes (pretty nice for Chi area), that the butcher where the meat was procured is a fraudster selling not only rotten meat but not any meat at all, that these peoples kids, family, and/or friends work for the "non-profit" making absurd amounts of money (funded by the taxpayer of course), etc. etc. etc.

M: This IS what I mean by seeing what you believe.

C: When someone says, 'Yeah, no shit this happened, we've always known they're corrupt, this is just completely expected', someone comes along and says, 'Hey, I'm only regurgitating what the newspaper and this town leader said, I don't know either way. What do you base your skepticism on? Since the newspaper didn't spoon feed you some contradictory reporting, don't even question why this is a money grab, simply, don't question anything at all.'

M: I am not offering skepticism. I am trying to explain to you how we operate, how we create a world and how we react to it via faith in our beliefs. I am saying we don't react to the world free from pain because we are attached to the emotions it feeds.

C: We are now here in this thread. Do you understand now or are you still confused/trolling?

I am neither confused or trolling, what ever that may mean, in any way that I see. I am only sorry you are bitter about things when I don't think you have to be. Because I do not make the assumptions that you do, because I know the impotence of rage, I do not suffer as you do. I try to find the best ways I can for you to see it too.

 

[OverVolt]

chucky2: I have no pain other than the pain of having money forcibly taken from me under the pretense of it being used for positive societaly benefit only to then hear about it time and time again being blown either on rediculous thing, blown improperly, corruptly spent, just flat out stolen, mismanaged....well, I think you get the idea. The pain would come from what either I myself could have done with my own extra money, or, what actual good may have come from my money still going to society yet being used for something truly positive.

M: That is the pain that I speak of and is the source of your anger that things are that way.

C: As far as my seeing this through just my understanding, I don't think you can imagine how true I wished that to be. That would suggest there is the Reality possiblity that just maybe, this extra theft of private money to the public trust will be used for something good for the public.

M: The alternative to just seeing though how you were conditioned is not necessarily that the world suddenly becomes rosy. Everything you see may actually be real. But because of the disgust you feel that money is taken from you and wasted or used for empty reasons causes you pain, you experience anger toward the political system around you. You believe this is a proper reaction to reality but you can't transfer it to me or other people. You suffer from what I call the impotency of rage. There is nothing you or I can do to change the minds of fools. It is resistance to this real fact, I believe, that makes us suffer. The alternate way to experience reality, in my opinion, is to surrender. To surrender is to let go and accept. You and I can do nothing. There is no guilt or anger in surrender that drives our beliefs because he who has surrendered has died and specifically to the ego, all that we believe about ourselves and reality because of our conditioning.

When you walk in the desert alone, there is only silence and infinite sky, there is only the potential, if the mind is quiet, for direct perception. There is no self telling itself a story. We have become deeply attached to things. The pain of separation from the ability to live immediately in the hear and now causes far more pain than you may be ready to admit.

C: This is Crook Co. It simply will not be.

M: It will or it won't depending on how many minds are willing to let go. You or I can only do ourselves and no one else.

C: If they steal $600k, spend $2M, the public will see a phantom of what it should have, the rest will be corruptly spend/diverted.

Let me try and give you an example:

Lets say there were some starving puppies in the towns common area. The town leader told her people, 'Hey, letting those puppies starve...that's just wrong. Let me and my cronies decide to steal some more tax money from you and use it to buy some meat for those poor starving puppies.' Now, pretty much all the people in the town, whether they're the ones that benefit from the corrupt town leader or who just live to fund her and her sides money grabs, understand that the town leader is completely full of shit when she says this. Yet, that desire is there to not only help the puppies (what good hearted person wouldn't?) but also, to benefit from the meat sales, the behind the scenes payoffs, etc. etc. So, finally, the town leader gets her new theft meat tax, and its reported the puppies are being fed. Months, years, decades later, it's discovered that the puppies still are starving, despite it being reported that the puppies are being fed, there being groups that get funding from public funds theft to make sure the puppies don't starve, that these groups just so happen to have ties to this town leader, that these people despite acting poor, acting like they care for the poor, live in $300k+ homes/condos/townhomes (pretty nice for Chi area), that the butcher where the meat was procured is a fraudster selling not only rotten meat but not any meat at all, that these peoples kids, family, and/or friends work for the "non-profit" making absurd amounts of money (funded by the taxpayer of course), etc. etc. etc.

M: This IS what I mean by seeing what you believe.

C: When someone says, 'Yeah, no shit this happened, we've always known they're corrupt, this is just completely expected', someone comes along and says, 'Hey, I'm only regurgitating what the newspaper and this town leader said, I don't know either way. What do you base your skepticism on? Since the newspaper didn't spoon feed you some contradictory reporting, don't even question why this is a money grab, simply, don't question anything at all.'

M: I am not offering skepticism. I am trying to explain to you how we operate, how we create a world and how we react to it via faith in our beliefs. I am saying we don't react to the world free from pain because we are attached to the emotions it feeds.

C: We are now here in this thread. Do you understand now or are you still confused/trolling?

I am neither confused or trolling, what ever that may mean, in any way that I see. I am only sorry you are bitter about things when I don't think you have to be. Because I do not make the assumptions that you do, because I know the impotence of rage, I do not suffer as you do. I try to find the best ways I can for you to see it too.

You basically have been cornered into defending a bill that doesn't even benefit you in any way shape or form.

Of course you will say you aren't defending it just playing "really annoying devils advocate" meanwhile you make 8 paragraph posts making counterpoints on every page of the thread.

So yeah, you are defending it. You just don't want it to look that way. You are confused and just don't know it heh.

 

[Darwin333]

I asked you how you would defend the notion that since we tax cigarettes and alcohol because of the damage they do to society and all who buy them pay that tax, why would it be illegal to tax gun sales. How do you counter that the logic of my argument? I don't see your proposed solution does that.

It would be quite easy to argue that voting does just as much harm, and sometimes vastly more, to society when the voters pick the wrong asshole. Would you support a poll tax for the exact same reason you support a gun tax?

 

[Moonbeam]

You basically have been cornered into defending a bill that doesn't even benefit you in any way shape or form.

Of course you will say you aren't defending it just playing "really annoying devils advocate" meanwhile you make 8 paragraph posts making counterpoints on every page of the thread.

So yeah, you are defending it. You just don't want it to look that way. You are confused and just don't know it heh.

You claim I defend it. If so it should be easy for you to state my defense. Good luck.

 

[Midwayman]

Heh why only guns bought outside of the city limits of Chicago but within the county?

Typical screw the 'burbs action in cook county. Chicago has all the votes, so cities in the burbs of cook are basically puppet states of Chicago. Chicago needs to be split into its only county so it can't pull crap like this repeatedly. Also notice the toll roads around Chicago are never in the City itself. Always in the burbs.

 

[OverVolt]

You claim I defend it. If so it should be easy for you to state my defense. Good luck.

By being very annoying until people give up. :awe:

 

[Moonbeam]

By being very annoying until people give up. :awe:

That is your defense, not mine, how you, in your factual impotence, shine me on. You believe me to be the source of your annoyance and never consider that you may be easily annoyed because you're an emotional mess. You do not have the experience or wisdom to know that when something bothers you it your problem and your flaws that make that possible. This is one of a number of facts that I know that annoy the fuck out of many people, folk stuffed full of themselves but obtuse when it come to introspection. Give up?

 

[Fern]

The right to drink alcohol is in the constitution. It is taxes and it is discouraged in many situations.

I don't think so, at least I haven't been able to find it.

The 21st Amendment to repeal prohibition does not refer to, nor seem to imply, any such right.

Fern

 

[Moonbeam]

I don't think so, at least I haven't been able to find it.

The 21st Amendment to repeal prohibition does not refer to, nor seem to imply, any such right.

Fern

You could be right. I put the fact that since the law making the sale of alcohol for consumption was repealed and alcohol is made to drink, that fact specifically emphasizes the right to drink it. I assumed further that since it used to be an unenumerated right to drink that was constitutionally taken away, restoring it enumerates it.

 

[OverVolt]

That is your defense, not mine, how you, in your factual impotence, shine me on. You believe me to be the source of your annoyance and never consider that you may be easily annoyed because you're an emotional mess. You do not have the experience or wisdom to know that when something bothers you it your problem and your flaws that make that possible. This is one of a number of facts that I know that annoy the fuck out of many people, folk stuffed full of themselves but obtuse when it come to introspection. Give up?

You are scared to take a stance you aren't in a position to lecture me.

I don't agree with the bill(gee that was hard). Not only is the premise of it reducing crime wrong, but it hurts the businesses who sell guns. People ARE going to shop elsewhere for a better price, not all of them, but they won't hit $600,000 revenue like they say they will. Tax revenues are often overestimated.

You argue on their behalf but then say you don't actually think those things. So whatever. A stance of neutrality is actually a stance for the status quo, neutrality just implies keeping things the way they are (presumably because their agenda is currently benefiting :awe🙂

 

[Moonbeam]

OverVolt: You are scared to take a stance you aren't in a position to lecture me.

M: In order for me to know that I am afraid to take a stance on this issue I would have to be totally aware of every unconscious motivation I have, but speaking for those of which I am conscious, I do not believe you are right. What I see is that I am not in a position, lack sufficient information and knowledge to take one. While I believe that, say Chucky2 has been programmed by his past, I can't know for sure if the stereotypes he has formed about the law makers aren't closer to the truth than the reality they claim to represent. So what you call fear I would call humility. As for lecturing you, I am very comfortable with what I said.

O: I don't agree with the bill(gee that was hard).

M: It's not hard at all if you believe you are qualified to hold that opinion.

O: Not only is the premise of it reducing crime wrong,

M: And your proof is............ naturally your opinion. You do not know but you think you do. Where is your data?

O: but it hurts the businesses who sell guns.

M: That would not be my top priority. Banking regulations strictly applied might mean the economic crisis we are in didn't happen and bankers might be less rich.

O: People ARE going to shop elsewhere for a better price, not all of them, but they won't hit $600,000 revenue like they say they will. Tax revenues are often overestimated.

M: The fact that revenues are often overestimated does not mean they always are or will in this case. You are not thinking logically, but with intention to see things as you believe them to be. You have no idea what revenues this law may create and neither do I which is another of those reasons why I am hesitant to crystalize an attitude.

O: You argue on their behalf but then say you don't actually think those things.

M: No, I argued that the arguments advanced were straw dogs that the arguments being advanced were irrational. Law A to raise revenue to deal with the effects of gun violence was B, passed to reduce gun violence.

O: So whatever. A stance of neutrality is actually a stance for the status quo, neutrality just implies keeping things the way they are (presumably because their agenda is currently benefiting :awe🙂

M: Your thinking, if that's the right word for it, amazes me. The status quo is things left as they are without the law. That would be my likely position. I see the problem of gun violence as a profoundly, let me say that a few more times, a profoundly profoundly profoundly difficult question to address and I am a nobody. I am not happy with any positions that I yet see. The question to me is, what do you do about human violence. Human violence is the issue to me. It wouldn't surprise me if you have an answer for that too. But whatever the answer is, I'm sure it will be bad for gun sales and the security industry, not to mention law enforcement.

 

[chucky2]

chucky2: snip

I simply cannot waste time on this inanity. You are of the mind that we should just not judge this new law and give it time to see what happens. That's fine, that's going to happen anyways since Crook Co. Politicians get passed what Crook Co Politicians need to get passed.

Everyone else who lives here, even those that jizz down their pants at their side getting yet another money grab enacted, know and understand what I've already pointed out about this law.

Why you would ever give a continual and multiple time convicted child rapist another kid to watch unsupervised I will never understand. You seem hell bent in saying, Well, we don't know he'll rape this one.

I'll say this: Exactly what of Crook Co's past would lead you to believe that this is a good law and/or not a money grab?

Chuck

 

[LunarRay]

I don't think so, at least I haven't been able to find it.

The 21st Amendment to repeal prohibition does not refer to, nor seem to imply, any such right.

Fern

I would think the Right to consume 'intoxicating liquors' is and was an implied Right... The 18th dealt with making, shipping, and etc... the 21st repealed that so those two don't address the Right of Consumption. I think it, the implied Right, is up there with the Right to consume Pepsi and Beer, Wine and Milk... (Assuming none of those four are on the Schedule 1,2,3,4 or 5 on the CSA.... yet)

 

[Moonbeam]

I simply cannot waste time on this inanity. You are of the mind that we should just not judge this new law and give it time to see what happens. That's fine, that's going to happen anyways since Crook Co. Politicians get passed what Crook Co Politicians need to get passed.

Everyone else who lives here, even those that jizz down their pants at their side getting yet another money grab enacted, know and understand what I've already pointed out about this law.

Why you would ever give a continual and multiple time convicted child rapist another kid to watch unsupervised I will never understand. You seem hell bent in saying, Well, we don't know he'll rape this one.

I'll say this: Exactly what of Crook Co's past would lead you to believe that this is a good law and/or not a money grab?

Chuck

You state this as truth whereas to me it is only your opinion. I cannot hand you another child to watch unsupervised or state with conviction either, that I can't trust you. I am of the mind that if you judge the law you have to do it fairly. I do not have the knowledge to do that. I am neither for or against the law. I feel you are anger at me because I can't take your side against something you are angry about. As I said, the status quo would be where I would have stood until I know a lot more than I currently do.

Nothing in my past relates to Cook county at all.

 

[chucky2]

You state this as truth whereas to me it is only your opinion. I cannot hand you another child to watch unsupervised or state with conviction either, that I can't trust you. I am of the mind that if you judge the law you have to do it fairly. I do not have the knowledge to do that. I am neither for or against the law. I feel you are anger at me because I can't take your side against something you are angry about. As I said, the status quo would be where I would have stood until I know a lot more than I currently do.

Nothing in my past relates to Cook county at all.

Please stop responding in this thread then about this law. If you're not from Crook Co., or are not aware of how things are done here, you simply are too ignorant to comment. And just wow on this: "...or state with conviction either, that I can't trust you." Wow. How does one even go about responding to that... 😵😵😵

 

[Moonbeam]

Please stop responding in this thread then about this law. If you're not from Crook Co., or are not aware of how things are done here, you simply are too ignorant to comment. And just wow on this: "...or state with conviction either, that I can't trust you." Wow. How does one even go about responding to that... 😵😵😵

By ignorant I mean not only lacking in data but also lacking the programming you call your personal truth. I see you in part as a religious believer dogmatic and certain of your beliefs. You are just like the Crooks you say you oppose but with different opinions. I believe the folk you oppose there are as sure as you are that their intentions are good. I don't trust either of you for that reason. Consider the possibility that in the South you find more antipathy to blacks than you do in California. Why, because the culture there is more contaminated with it. The culture you grew up in may have similarly affected you on an emotional level. I spent a lifetime getting rid of as much of the stupidity I was taught as a child, I don't want to swallow a big bite of yours. That you seem not to question your fundamental beliefs raises red flags for me. I destroyed everything I once held sacred and was once absolutely sure about.

 

[chucky2]

Except this is not getting rid of stupidity, it'd be getting rid of Reality. In Reality, it'd be stupid on an amazing level to actually take a neutral or positive stance on what the Crook Co Leadership is pushing out. Their track record is so amazing consistent it cannot be ignored...and that's on stuff that is for more complex than this. This new law, it's just a clear money grab...they make no bones about hiding it.

Seriously...why do you keep willfully pretending to remain "open" about things when it has been explained to you how F'd up Crook Co is? It's like you remain committed at all costs, despite knowing jack about Crook and the history of Crook, to remain "fair and balanced", yet you do not realize you're the only person willing to do so. Do you not understand that even the people who benefit from Crook openly acknowledge how F'd up and crooked Crook Co is??? This would be akin to the police and prosecuters openly admitting how crooked and F'd up the "justice" system is. That is how bad it is here.

 

[Moonbeam]

Except this is not getting rid of stupidity, it'd be getting rid of Reality. In Reality, it'd be stupid on an amazing level to actually take a neutral or positive stance on what the Crook Co Leadership is pushing out. Their track record is so amazing consistent it cannot be ignored...and that's on stuff that is for more complex than this. This new law, it's just a clear money grab...they make no bones about hiding it.

Seriously...why do you keep willfully pretending to remain "open" about things when it has been explained to you how F'd up Crook Co is? It's like you remain committed at all costs, despite knowing jack about Crook and the history of Crook, to remain "fair and balanced", yet you do not realize you're the only person willing to do so. Do you not understand that even the people who benefit from Crook openly acknowledge how F'd up and crooked Crook Co is??? This would be akin to the police and prosecuters openly admitting how crooked and F'd up the "justice" system is. That is how bad it is here.

The way you see reality determines your reality. You create your world. The desert is silent and empty of any reality but itself. What you see determines what you do. What do you want to do about gun violence. Do you have a plan or even some suggestions that might very modestly offset the effects in nothing can be done directly by laws?

 

[OverVolt]

In reality this thread is stupidity :awe:

 

[Moonbeam]

In reality this thread is stupidity :awe:

That's your reality. You feel stupid so your notion of what it is to be smart is very important to you. You need things to be stupid so you can point to them with your version of intelligence. You have no idea how smart you could be if you weren't full of shit. Your concealed prejudice, the unexamined and unconscious assumptions you run on is what make you see stupid. You won't change as long as you maintain your arrogance. Have a care.

 

[michal1980]

That's your reality. You feel stupid so your notion of what it is to be smart is very important to you. You need things to be stupid so you can point to them with your version of intelligence. You have no idea how smart you could be if you weren't full of shit. Your concealed prejudice, the unexamined and unconscious assumptions you run on is what make you see stupid. You won't change as long as you maintain your arrogance. Have a care.

do you just like to ramble?

 

[shortylickens]

do you just like to ramble?

You've been here HOW LONG?

 

[michal1980]

You've been here HOW LONG?

He's been unusually wordy in this thread.

 

[Moonbeam]

He's been unusually wordy in this thread.

I have tried very hard to explain things as best I can. You are just looking for things to complain about because you have a motivation to do that. You are biased against me from past experience and this past experience creates what you see.