Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[G-Flex]

Yeah, it's quite Ironic that Iran is incredibly transgender friendly, at the expense of homosexuals.

Are they really, or do they lump anything with the word "trans" in it into the "needs physical sexual reassignment" camp? I'm honestly curious how their treatment of transsexuals compares to that of the transgendered, intersexed, or any other non-heteronormative people... especially considering their treatment of homosexuality and women.

[Truean]

Yeah, it's quite Ironic that Iran is incredibly transgender friendly, at the expense of homosexuals.

Are they really, or do they lump anything with the word "trans" in it into the "needs physical sexual reassignment" camp? I'm honestly curious how their treatment of transsexuals compares to that of the transgendered, intersexed, or any other non-heteronormative people... especially considering their treatment of homosexuality and women.

O there's lots of lumping going on. It's bad. If you're anything but truly transgender and get lumped in there, then you're screwed. However, if you are actually transgender, then you're relatively ok.

Granted, again, they treat women like crap, but at least you're now the same as any other woman in their eyes. That is you will be treated like crap, but no more so than any other girl. The real benefit is, strangely enough, family acceptance as a daughter. This is because the religious figures tell your family that you're not gay (which they hate) and are instead trans, which is somehow ok according to the supreme leader. Moreover, the government pays for everything.

You have to remember, it is a total theocracy over there. Even the president really doesn't have any authority until and unless it comes from the Supreme Leader, Khomeini, who is the head cleric. Khomeini has the last word on everything. Khomeini found he couldn't ignore the problem of children being born intersexed when he saw them with his own eyes and basically saw an opportunity to deal with his hatred of every other non heterosexual out there. Thus, Khomeini says it in Iran and that's it. He says transsexuals are ok, so they are. Are you gonna go against the guy they call Supreme Leader? Exactly.

I don't really like this idea and wouldn't like gaining from other people's suffering.

[Il Palazzo]

You probably wanted to say Khamenei instead of Khomeini, though. The latter has been dead for over two decades.

[Truean]

You probably wanted to say Khamenei instead of Khomeini, though. The latter has been dead for over two decades.

I copied and pasted because no one ever thought I was going to be able to spell that correctly, but, yeah.

[G-Flex]

O there's lots of lumping going on. It's bad. If you're anything but truly transgender and get lumped in there, then you're screwed. However, if you are actually transgender, then you're relatively ok.

Wait, are you using "transgender" to mean the same thing as "transsexual" here? I'd rather neither of us be conflating the two concepts.

[Truean]

O there's lots of lumping going on. It's bad. If you're anything but truly transgender and get lumped in there, then you're screwed. However, if you are actually transgender, then you're relatively ok.

Wait, are you using "transgender" to mean the same thing as "transsexual" here? I'd rather neither of us be conflating the two concepts.

[ shrugs] I dunno, and honestly in that country I don't think they consider them different. Hence the whole "They lump everybody in with trans."

[Pnx]

I'm... err... really not sure whether to generally consider this a victory or a defeat.

[shadenight123]

it's religion, thus its wrong.
it's religion, thus its right.
it's religion, thus you shouldn't care about it.

choose one of the three and you're fine on every religious matter.
and agree to disagree.

that said, am i the only one who'd wish for every actor/actress who earns more than 10000 euros/dollars to be over taxed until they get back on their feets?
i mean, really cruise? you're giving your child a 130000 total worth of gift? a pony, i can understand that, really, but a tiara and a bracelet? with ancient diamonds?

[G-Flex]

that said, am i the only one who'd wish for every actor/actress who earns more than 10000 euros/dollars to be over taxed until they get back on their feets?
i mean, really cruise? you're giving your child a 130000 total worth of gift? a pony, i can understand that, really, but a tiara and a bracelet? with ancient diamonds?

Why are you singling out actors? Are they less deserving of money because they're popular?

[Necro910]

that said, am i the only one who'd wish for every actor/actress who earns more than 10000 euros/dollars to be over taxed until they get back on their feets?
i mean, really cruise? you're giving your child a 130000 total worth of gift? a pony, i can understand that, really, but a tiara and a bracelet? with ancient diamonds?

Why are you singling out actors? Are they less deserving of money because they're popular?

He's probably singling out actors because they don't contribute like farmers or teachers. They're entertainers, you get entertained, and that's about it.

Anyhow, those 1m+ gifts stimulate the economy. I'm against more taxes for the rich. They pay more money in taxes than you anyways, just use a flat tax.

[ChairmanPoo]

He's probably singling out actors because they don't contribute like farmers or teachers. They're entertainers, you get entertained, and that's about it.

More likely because they earn obscene ammounts of money. But it's not like they're the only ones. And unlike some others I could name they don't accidentally the whole economy when they screw up, just their careers.

I do think they are grossly overpaid, though. Same as with soccer players.

[GlyphGryph]

I'm against more taxes for the rich. They pay more money in taxes than you anyways, just use a flat tax.

Hoo hoo hoo hoo, yeah, sure. Do you mean more total, or more as a percentage of net income? I mean, the first is pretty obvious - When you have all the money, of course you're going to end up getting more taken from you!

And no matter how much money you make, every Xth dollar is still taxed at the same rate. So...

[EveryZig]

Anyhow, those 1m+ gifts stimulate the economy. I'm against more taxes for the rich. They pay more money in taxes than you anyways, just use a flat tax.

Seriously or are you just devil's advocating like Virex was earlier?
First of all, the rich should pay vastly more taxes than everyone when they also have vastly more money than anyone.
Secondly, the rick spend a larger proportion of the money they have than the poor do, as they can actually afford to have savings.
Thirdly, even if rich people were always better for the economy, there comes a point when a stimulated economy helps most citizens less than a more equal wealth distribution would.

it's religion, thus its wrong.
it's religion, thus its right.
it's religion, thus you shouldn't care about it.

choose one of the three and you're fine on every religious matter.
and agree to disagree.

Are you talking about the thing in Iran? The fact that they are caused by religion does not change the fact that those are actual laws that affect actual people. That isn't something that you can just agree to disagree on (unless you intend to go all the way and argue that what happens to people doesn't really matter).

[Vector]

Secondly, the rick spend a larger proportion of the money they have than the poor do, as they can actually afford to have savings.

You mean smaller, right?

[G-Flex]

Secondly, the rick spend a larger proportion of the money they have than the poor do, as they can actually afford to have savings.

I'm pretty sure this isn't true. The poor spend their money (largely because they need to), and the rich invest their money to make exponentially more money. Not to mention that capital gains tax is a complete mess anyway. This makes a flat tax a bad idea, as it still allows the very rich to continuously invest their money, meaning there's little economic mobility.

Also: The marginal value of a dollar is not constant. If you give a really poor guy $200, that will probably affect his life an extremely large amount more than if you give a really rich guy that same $200. If someone making $1,000,000/yr all of a sudden makes $500,000/yr instead, and the extra money goes toward 10 other people making $75,000/yr instead of $25,000/yr, average quality of life goes up as opposed to staying the same. This is another reason why a flat tax is a bad idea.