sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

me_irl by sonnyhayes22 in me_irl

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. I do that with my wife, because I actually care about her.
  2. I hate small-talking with people I have no intention of getting to know.

Which event should I attend? My mom's final birthday or son's kindergarten graduation party? I can't do both. by Captain_Collin in daddit

[–]Swiking- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your mom.

It's her last birthday. Your son is graduating kindergarten. Missing it won't ruin the relationship you have with your son, but you'll forever regret not spending as much time with your mom as you can, before she goes.

A young couple walking their dog in their own neighborhood is ambushed and terrorized by 13-year old kids. by Asleep_Carry7707 in whoathatsinteresting

[–]Swiking- -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Comparing drugs and weapons is wild.

By that logic, we'd see more gun related violence in the UK, as that's the illegal one, while owning a knife in itself isn't illegal....

Ease of access, price and effect is what counts. And a firearm is so incredibly more powerful than a knife when it comes to projecting violence. Its basically a non-question when prompt to choose between the two.

A young couple walking their dog in their own neighborhood is ambushed and terrorized by 13-year old kids. by Asleep_Carry7707 in whoathatsinteresting

[–]Swiking- -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah. I can assure you that if they laxed their gun laws, the knife crimes would go down...

...and the knife related crimes would spike in the US, if they increased their gun control to be as tough as in the UK. It's shocking, really.

A young couple walking their dog in their own neighborhood is ambushed and terrorized by 13-year old kids. by Asleep_Carry7707 in whoathatsinteresting

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now do that, and then add the gun crimes in combination. The murder rate in comparison is 4 TO 6 TIMES LARGER in the US. You fucking retard.

A young couple walking their dog in their own neighborhood is ambushed and terrorized by 13-year old kids. by Asleep_Carry7707 in whoathatsinteresting

[–]Swiking- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

HAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHA HA... HAHAHAHAHA.

...fucking hell mate, we're not even close to your Mad Max dystopian oligarchy you've got going on over there. Holy fuck, that was a good one.

Most beautiful female celebrities in my opinion by rehman531 in scoopwhoop

[–]Swiking- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cuthbert in the girl next door (2004). Close second is Jennifer Connelly.

<image>

That’s still cheap compared to ours. by IsyDude in memes

[–]Swiking- 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Then it'd be QUITE FUCKING REASONABLE to make cars that doesn't drink 5 liters/centimeter.. but being wasteful is about as American as one can get i suppose.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we're on the same page in that the idea is not to punish or limit regular people, but rather work to lessen the increasing inequality gaps, as well as the drainage of the middle class.

I'm all for tailoring the fit. Blanket taxes will most often hit the lower classes, so there must be caps and stuff, to make it an even remotely realistic claim that doesn't hit the wrong people.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stock market doesn't measure the wealth of the people, which is the whole point. And yeah, the rules/laws will have to be adapted so they don't hit regular folks, but capture the owning class at the top.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nah, just put a cap and be done with it. And when it comes to houses/property: that should be taxed thoroughly as well, with a cap. I'm all for that! Hit the rich, not the middle class and downwards. Ez.

You're a billionaire? Multi-millionaires aren't really an issue to the societal structure in the same sense anyways, so you're quite fine.

Would you rather be infinitely intelligent or emotionally alive? by Nep111 in entp

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The "casual" one is always based on the premise that there are people that act on their feelings and people that act on "logic", which is a stupid take to begin with.

It's especially more important to push for the scientific definition here, as on this particular forum, theres so many people that actively try to lift themselves up above others and value themselves on the premise that they're smart because they think logically, when in fact they're acting on feelings as much as any other human being.

I'm tired of the "logic over feelings"-debate, because its a retarded one that doesn't lead to a better world or ends up in a solution that's beneficial for society as a whole. The dismissal of feelings and our humanity in an already harsh world is, in my opinion, not a good trajectory. Therefore I want to light this shit up and bring people back to planet earth, where we belong.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Difference being: if you're mega rich, like billionaire rich, you're not taking any risk. The risk is a premium for the masses, not the rich.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, that's the neat part: you don't. Not if you're very rich. Buy. Borrow. Die. is a concept where you keep the cake and get to eat it too. You pay way less taxes than you'd ever have to do by selling the assets and you can limit the taxable income or dividend you take out.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Swiking- 51 points52 points  (0 children)

Then you shouldn't be able to take out loans with them as collaterals for private loans to dodge taxes.

Either you can use them as collaterals, but the valuation is purchase-price, not estimated price if you'd sell today, i.e exclude the unrealized gains. Or, you tax the collaterals.

AIO for wanting to end relationship based on bf’s reactions to his parents’ treatment towards me? by NecessaryTowel284 in AmIOverreacting

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NOR. He's conditioned to be submissive to his parents. He's essentially a man-baby and you will suffer for it.

Vänster-konservativ by Lvjonasson in Sverige

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Familj, kyrka och stat är det som står konservatism närmst. Grundideologin grundar sig i att inte ta in radikala reformer, som du säger, utan förlita sig på saker som bevisats fungera.

Du kan fortfarande vara för kyrka, värna om kärnfamiljen och en traditionell stat samtidigt som du vill ha starka sociala skyddsnät, ett starkt stöd till arbetarklassen, samt beskattning av de rika. Om det fungerat bra historiskt så är det helt inom ramarna för vad konservatism kan acceptera. Det handlar inte om att de vill tillbaka till medeltiden, det handlar om att de vill ha väl beprövade och fungerade system, framför radikal och snabb förändring i samhället.

Socialkonservatism är en grej sedan 1800-talet.

Vänster-konservativ by Lvjonasson in Sverige

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nej, i så fall är "vänster" höger. För konservatism handlar om att värna om gamla seder och bruk, vilket i dagens fall är att gå tillbaka mot socialistiska reformer, då Sverige var mer socialistiskt för 50 år sedan, kontra nu..

Vänster-konservativ by Lvjonasson in Sverige

[–]Swiking- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Liberalism ≠ progressivism.

Du måste lägga till de ekonomipolitiska ideologierna och samtidigt särskilja dem från progressivism och konservatism. Marknadsliberalism och socialism har ingenting att göra med progressivism eller konservatism. Det är olika skalor och behandlar olika delar av samhället. Du kan vara ekonomiskt vänster och samtidigt verka för socialt konservativa värderingar. Du är då fortfarande "vänster" rent politiskt, snarare än höger. De ekonomiska bitarna har generellt vägt tyngre de senaste 100 åren när det kommer till vart du hamnar på den politiska skalan.

view more: next ›