|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's the only word I can think of. What about female perpetrators of domestic violence? Will men have to pay for them as well?
Bert
--------------------
Fighting for men's rights is fighting for children's and women's right's as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
Don't get mad. Get organised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...this is the kind of thing I mean. The first recipient for our letter-writing campaign was the Australian newspaper from which we learned this.
bg
safe4all.org
Men are from EARTH. Women are from EARTH. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:56 PM October 7th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I remember some time back, that there was discussion in our government (U.S.A.) about a "man tax" as well. That was several years ago. I'm suprised it was never implemented here.
I find it interesting that the folks in Sweden said; "Men have a responsibility".
As usual, though, WOMEN have NO responsibility.
Yeah, It's so hard to be a woman. What, with out all the responsibility and all.
(sarcasm)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
I'm no longer their whipping boy.
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's
Farm no more...,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:52 PM October 7th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"It must be obvious to all of us that society has a huge problem with male violence against women..."
Actually it's only obvious to stupid people. Anyone with half a brain knows how the domestic violence scam works.
Anybody with half a brain knows that we have a serious problem with women who batter men
Ray
Please do not scroll up the page of the linked iten(s). All the info I'm trying to convey is as the page initially comes up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know, check out the poll at the http://www.ktvu.com/news/3781021/detail.html link. The 4th option reads something like, "You can't tax all men for something only some men do" - currently as of my writing it is only at just over 50% of the respondents who have selected this option. The other three options either support the idea or ignore the reason suggested in option 4. Now if people were asked this question with the genders reversed, do you suppose it'd only be just over 50% saying no? Or more like 99%? And it's amazing to me, though again, no surprise, that the Blood Tax on men that has occurred for millenia and foisted on them by governments goes utterly ignored.
It really comes as no surprise. Actually I am surprised it hasn't been seen sooner. It also is no surprise that a man-hole politician is the source of the suggestion for a "man-tax". The Swedish pol who suggested it sounds crazy. But you know, plenty of crazy pols have gotten their way.
I wonder, just when will men realize what is happening and wake up and rise up? What will it take? I wonder....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, the second most popular opinion was that only those convicted of a crime should pay. I think that this opinion implicitly agrees that those who have done nothing should not be held responsible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:39 AM October 9th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
That's all well and good.
But will WOMEN who are convicted of a crime have to pay as men convicted will?
The way things usually go, I doubt it.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not a chance in hell that question #5 should be:
Do you think that women should be taxed for battering men?
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was no mention that men are ever battered at all, although question 3 suggested that women batter other women.
The only encouraging sign is that virtually no-one supported the man tax.
Don't get mad. Get organised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schyman said...that discrimination in Sweden followed "the same pattern" as in Afghanistan under the Taliban.
Just when I think that nothing can surprise me any more, the feminists always come up with an even worse howler.
The real horror is that views like this are regarded as respectable.
Don't get mad. Get organised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:02 PM October 9th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
In a way, they are right - it is following the pattern of the Taliban....
...just not in the way that they think it does (i.e. any society that does this is emasculating men the same way that the Taliban emasculated women).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about a White Tax to cover the cost of racist crime? Or a Muslim Tax to pay for anti-terrorism security?
No, didn't think so. And I'm not suggesting that only whites are racist-- part of the reason for drawing these parallels is precisely because I recognise that none of these crimes is exclusively committed by one group of people, contrary to popular belief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is also one of the world's most advanced nations in terms of gender equality
Not anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:02 AM October 8th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
In effect, a man tax to compensate women for purported violence against men would sanction such violence provided one paid the tax. Would a man tax alter what would constitute punishment for violence against women? One would think so.
Economists have proposed pollution taxes. If a company pollutes the river, that effectively prevents others from using it. Taxing a polluter effectively compensates others for polluting resources that otherwise might have been used. Once this cost is paid out, a polluter is free to dump toxic waste into the river, or pollute the air--the community has been compensated. The state would not take action against a law-abiding tax payer for the pollution covered under the tax. So in effect, a man tax appears to be the cost of exercising the right to inflict various harms upon women. Once this cost is paid out, then one would imagine men would be free to pursue those acts, covered by the tax, of violence against women without fear of reprisal from the state. A determination of which acts and harms would have to be made, and a cost for the tax set.
If one begins taxing genders, then it also becomes possible to tax men and women differently. Why should men pay for services that only women user? Why should women pay for services that only men use? A non-gender-blind system of taxes undermines the ideal of non-discrimination of citizens on the basis of gender, and it opens the door to other gender based taxes. One could argue that men bear the greatest risk in war: they are the majority of people killed and injured. Women benefit, but do not assume equal risk. A tax levied upon women for not risking their lives in war could be conceived.
Men's economist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a way I have no sympathy or compassion for them at all. This is exactly what they get for complaicently letting the feminazis commandeer, occupy, and "take ownership"of their world. To any Swede who might be reading this forum "HEY SVEN!!! I TOLD YOU SO!!!"
Let this be an example of what is in store for us if our resolve falters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to me that with women living seven years longer than men thanks to all the women-only health care funding, men are paying a 10% tax on every breath of their lives.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
