Don't most sex shops require that you be 18 to even enter?WTF of the Day: Elementary Students Take Field Trip to Sex Shop
Yep… you read that right. Students from a Minnesota elementary school were taken to a true-blue “adult novelty store” as a field trip for a sex education class – and were even allowed to purchase products. But that’s only half of what upset the students’ parents so much. The parents say they were never even notified about the outing. I can remember a time when elementary students needed a parent to sign a permission slip for every single field trip no matter how benign. Those times seem like they may be behind us now.
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
I'm sure that's dependent on where you are. Pretty sure that's the case in Canada, but I dunno if it might even be province-specific. And you guys have a lot more state-by-state stuff down there than we have provincial differences.
Looks like a fun teacher. Would attend class and bring own beanbag chair.Here's a picture of the teacher in question on the field trip thing.
GasBandit
Staff member
I bet the magic school bus she'd drive would be a little bit more magic, if you get my drift.
Like...the flying bus from Sky High?I bet the magic school bus she'd drive would be a little bit more magic, if you get my drift.
Dave
Staff member
I have been saying this for years and been shouted down. VINDICATION!!
Dave
Staff member
Not here. I cheat on you occasionally with other forums. I haven't for a while, though.
GasBandit
Staff member
Wow, that gallery sure didn't last long.
GasBandit
Staff member
Not surprised in the least, considering some of the stuff UPS and FedEx drivers walk off with. It's a pretty universal problem with all of the package delivery companies: you really have no way of proving that the package didn't just get lost in transit or stolen from your porch, short of searching the driver's home for your stuff... and you need a long pattern of package losses to make that happen.
It's just easier to do with stuff destined for military bases because there is like a 10% chance it'll get sent to the wrong base ANYWAY.
Harder than you think. They scan those packages everywhere. They're scanned when given to Fedex/UPS, scanned again at terminal, scanned when loaded on outbound truck, scanned again at destination terminal, again when leaving there, again when out for delivery, and finally when dropped at end-destination. You have to have a couple of people working together to get a package to disappear, and it does happen, but harder than just "I didn't get it on my truck" for a driver, because they also have a video to look at to match the scans.
I have a couple of friends that have worked for those guys, plus I get LOTS of stuff from them (average day is 40+ packages), they figure out who their problems are fairly fast, and can usually get enough on them to be able to get the police involved in fairly short order.
GasBandit
Staff member
Apparently, we need to elect Rubio to get him and especially his wife out from behind the wheel.
Interesting. I know very little about Thailand's particular culture of transgenderism, but it appears that they basically updated their dress code to allow transgender students to wear clothing that is in fashion with those transgender norms while also simply pointing out that students could wear whichever standard uniform they wanted to anyway.
GasBandit
Staff member
I've said it before a hundred times, I'll say it again (probably another hundred):
There's no bureaucrat like a Texas bureaucrat.
There's no bureaucrat like a Texas bureaucrat.
GasBandit
Staff member
On the one hand, he's right - the puffed up assneck jackholes in Austin made the law, and it's his job to enforce it regardless of his feelings on the matter, but on the other, he could have pretended not to notice. I doubt even in his podunk town where nothing happens, that anybody spends time going over dashcam footage looking for lemonade stands they failed to shut down, especially the Chief.
I mean, seriously, does the Chief of Police of Overton have NOTHING better to do than drive around looking for lemonade stands lacking permits? Well, then again, it is Overton.... which is about as "ass end of nowhere" as east Texas can get without being west Texas.
Man, I once ran and illegal fireworks stand just outside that town.
It was just 2 12 year olds sitting at table all night at a remote intersection... what could possibly go wrong.
It was just 2 12 year olds sitting at table all night at a remote intersection... what could possibly go wrong.
One thing that I disagree with is the idea of using property taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, etc, as a substitute for income taxes, and the reason for this is that state and local taxes are effectively regressive taxes - they have a higher burden on those with less, rather than being proportional. Why? Well, let's start with property taxes. Because for the non-wealthy, the bulk of a family's wealth is usually in their property. For a middle class family with a household income of $65,000 a year (2 earners), having a house and property with a market value of $300,000+ is going to be the bulk of their total net worth, but for an executive making $1,000,000 a year (including from investments/stock value, etc), that same property is just a fraction of their worth. You either have to be in a super-high priced real estate market (Beverly Hills, TriBeCa, Aspen, etc) or get into conspicuous consumption levels of property to have the same effect.
http://www.itep.org/pdf/whopaysreport.pdf[DOUBLEPOST=1434038424,1434038307][/DOUBLEPOST]
http://www.itep.org/pdf/whopaysreport.pdf[DOUBLEPOST=1434038424,1434038307][/DOUBLEPOST]
The dude also happens to have the perfect "pinprick cop who gets off on fucking with the defenseless" haircut.
GasBandit
Staff member
You think the super wealthy actually pay income taxes?
They don't pay enough, certainly. But saying, "Well, since they don't pay enough, we might as well get rid of it altogether" and replacing it with even more regressive taxes instead of increasing capital gains taxes and estate taxes (which would be almost entirely directed at the wealthiest Americans) doesn't seem like a good solution.
GasBandit
Staff member
There's always loopholes. Our federal tax code takes 74,000 pages to explain. Those with the means to do so will find ways to shelter their income. But what they can't shelter is their spending. The best way to get at massed wealth without getting "regressive" is a sales tax with a prebate, a-la the Fair Tax.
Dave
Staff member
What they could do is start the taxes for sales at higher rates based on the pricing of the object. Low cost goods would largely remain the same but more expensive stuff would be at a higher tax rate.
Of course, the super rich could just buy their stuff from other countries, but they can do that to get around any consumption tax.
Of course, the super rich could just buy their stuff from other countries, but they can do that to get around any consumption tax.
Except that again, sales tax hits lower income families much more heavily than the wealthy. Consumption falls with the level of income - low income families have to basically spend everything to keep afloat. According to the Fair Tax, a low income family ($25k / year) spending 100% of that would have a tax rate of 0%; a family with $100k/year in income spending $80k and saving $20k gets taxed 15% on that 80%, or effectively 12% of their income - as opposed to the 25% rate currently gained by income tax.
How is 12% more than 25%?
GasBandit
Staff member
You're assuming 25% with no effort to shelter, no write offs, no IRA contributions, etc, etc, etc.
But lower taxes on the middle and lower classes is also part of the point of the Fair Tax. A family earning $100k is middle class. Heck, it's lower middle class in NY/LA.
But, in the event that the federal income tax wouldn't be 100% replaced, well then, I guess it's just time to starve the pig, isn't it?
Okay, so the current income tax rate on the wealthiest bracket is currently what, 36%? How much would a family making $1,000,000 a year have to spent to match that $360,000 tax bill?
Well, the Fair Tax suggests a flat tax rate of 30% at best. So if they spend $900,000 a year on consumer goods, etc, that's $270,000 in taxes paid - 3/4 of the amount they'd currently owe.
Yeah, that sounds fair for them alright.