8. Do we have a fair taxation system?
Life of the people always needs expenditure. Expenditure for everything war, utility, disasters etc. Man or women is a greedy person. The needs always have been exceeding every time. Scientists show that needs of the person change during their satisfaction.
I guess every nation has that kind of taxation system they deserve. I from time to time reflect upon this problem. Why one country has different taxation system than another.
1) Compare with life when there was not society.
Let's deep down to the time when there were not so many inhabitants on the earth and people can live kind of more free from each other. There was a lot of what to eat and what to drink, though there were many riddle for mankind. People didn't think about future a lot. They went for the hunting when recently killed mammoth had been finished. All they need was themselves and bunch of stones that laid down under the feet. Do they need taxation. Sure no.
Developing of the society when people began to create some kind manufacture come to the idea of changing. Changing create value of change first that was another goods, but finally mankind came to the money system. Simultaneously people came to the more structured group of society. That was more organized society when small group of people can subdue another lager group of people and compel them to work more organized way thus increase efficiency of satisfying peoples needs. More over these small groups of people saddled the idea that there is an easy way not to produce but to take what is produce from another group of guy. These two reason, first money, second need to sustain own structure leaded mankind to the idea of gathering money from their own members. From the first time taxation system was very unfair. Because nobles paid nothing at the same time slaves paid all or defeated nation paid all. At that time no one was insured against lost everything in the struggle for paying less that another. Moreover system wasn't fair as well because taxation made by sight and always was exaggerated. At this place would be appropriate to mention joke about some greedy lord who sent their subordinate to take tax till the citizens of the area began to laugh. " Now! Enough! If they laugh that's mean they real have nothing to give." - exclaimed satisfied by this taxation system sovereign.
413 words.
Tuesday 17 January 2012
Saturday 14 January 2012
7. Is a lottery a good idea? (309)
7. Is a lottery a good idea?
Lottery is part of ancient business named gambling. Game of chance was part of the society scourge. Sometimes prostitution named one of the very old profession. Gambling is the same. Games of chance was ancient pastime. But gambling isn't exist without money. During the game of chance one person win money another lost it. Moreover if one lost money he lost not only his own money but money of his family. Gambling is sometime very filthy occupation. Because for someone gambling became part of the earning money and they began to use different tricks in order to win. That's how cheating in gambling is always waddle hand in hand. Gambling was different during the age of mankind. For me gambling in ancient time is dirty eating-house, filthy pirates roll the dice. During the game they shout and yell at each other. Sometimes they fight with each other. Another picture playing card in the high society. The aristocracy and nobility in the spacious hall plays card. They don't shout and scream at each other. So from this two picture from my memory I made a conclusion that people do need to gamble. And if the need to gamble that means that if society, in modern case, it is government of the country, don't take the gambling under control, it would be taken by criminals. Because gambling is part of the person nature. And argument that there are hundred of persons who lead their life without gambling or lottery isn't an argument. Just recall how nonalcoholic law was implemented in USA. During the two tens years criminals made very big money on desire to drink and to gamble. Gambling was not prohibited but during the game drinking was easily spread among the participant. That's why government should organize lottery in order take control over the ardor to spend money on gambling.
309 words.
Lottery is part of ancient business named gambling. Game of chance was part of the society scourge. Sometimes prostitution named one of the very old profession. Gambling is the same. Games of chance was ancient pastime. But gambling isn't exist without money. During the game of chance one person win money another lost it. Moreover if one lost money he lost not only his own money but money of his family. Gambling is sometime very filthy occupation. Because for someone gambling became part of the earning money and they began to use different tricks in order to win. That's how cheating in gambling is always waddle hand in hand. Gambling was different during the age of mankind. For me gambling in ancient time is dirty eating-house, filthy pirates roll the dice. During the game they shout and yell at each other. Sometimes they fight with each other. Another picture playing card in the high society. The aristocracy and nobility in the spacious hall plays card. They don't shout and scream at each other. So from this two picture from my memory I made a conclusion that people do need to gamble. And if the need to gamble that means that if society, in modern case, it is government of the country, don't take the gambling under control, it would be taken by criminals. Because gambling is part of the person nature. And argument that there are hundred of persons who lead their life without gambling or lottery isn't an argument. Just recall how nonalcoholic law was implemented in USA. During the two tens years criminals made very big money on desire to drink and to gamble. Gambling was not prohibited but during the game drinking was easily spread among the participant. That's why government should organize lottery in order take control over the ardor to spend money on gambling.
309 words.
Thursday 12 January 2012
6. Should men get paternity leave from work? (413)
Should men get paternity leave from work?
There is a very interesting question. And answer to it is simple for me. Moreover I have no idea how to develop this topic and write thousand words on such blunt topic. Of course man can get paternity leave from work. And for several reasons. First reason is when he earn not so much money than her wife. Second if he want to stay at home and take care for children or child. But in this case I feel a bit pity for him. Because it, paternity leave, seems a bit miserable for man. I don't know how the maternity feeling cherished to women. Is it a part of God's creation which given to our most beautiful part of the mankind or this habit or instinct was developed during the long way of evolution. But women have some kind of inner gear inside them to take care of children. This gear is inside even small girl. Girls used to play dolls from the tiny age and this is not an obvious attempt to follow fashion there is the inner instinct inherent to women.
That's why I have some dual feeling to the man who want to take a maternity, sorry, paternity leave. I feel sorry about him. Because probably he can be some sort of loser. Or he earn not so much money as do his wife. Or I even don't imagine another situation which can justify such a move. Man should be first in the family such behest of the God and nature of man and woman.
The decision that the man goes to maternity or for our example paternity leave is not come accidentally. And if women first ask about this she can
Man who don't want to take care about the child or children have a lot of excuse. Moreover he has a lot of pretext to elude from this obligation, for accidentally forget to feed child or unintentionally don't notice that child have some need or they behave themselves awkwardly with child. And women always angrily take their role as mother. Women always behave anxiously concerning their own babies. Most of the women want to have a baby badly even if some specimen of their array refuse this fact. Women and baby does it exist more beautifully depicted view. They can defend their babies very boldly and bravely and sometimes brightly. Women can
Women follow this instinct blindly without and logic explanation.
(413)
There is a very interesting question. And answer to it is simple for me. Moreover I have no idea how to develop this topic and write thousand words on such blunt topic. Of course man can get paternity leave from work. And for several reasons. First reason is when he earn not so much money than her wife. Second if he want to stay at home and take care for children or child. But in this case I feel a bit pity for him. Because it, paternity leave, seems a bit miserable for man. I don't know how the maternity feeling cherished to women. Is it a part of God's creation which given to our most beautiful part of the mankind or this habit or instinct was developed during the long way of evolution. But women have some kind of inner gear inside them to take care of children. This gear is inside even small girl. Girls used to play dolls from the tiny age and this is not an obvious attempt to follow fashion there is the inner instinct inherent to women.
That's why I have some dual feeling to the man who want to take a maternity, sorry, paternity leave. I feel sorry about him. Because probably he can be some sort of loser. Or he earn not so much money as do his wife. Or I even don't imagine another situation which can justify such a move. Man should be first in the family such behest of the God and nature of man and woman.
The decision that the man goes to maternity or for our example paternity leave is not come accidentally. And if women first ask about this she can
Man who don't want to take care about the child or children have a lot of excuse. Moreover he has a lot of pretext to elude from this obligation, for accidentally forget to feed child or unintentionally don't notice that child have some need or they behave themselves awkwardly with child. And women always angrily take their role as mother. Women always behave anxiously concerning their own babies. Most of the women want to have a baby badly even if some specimen of their array refuse this fact. Women and baby does it exist more beautifully depicted view. They can defend their babies very boldly and bravely and sometimes brightly. Women can
Women follow this instinct blindly without and logic explanation.
(413)
Friday 6 January 2012
Is torture ever acceptable? (349)
Very strange topic. What the authors of this topic would like us to answer. They answer is simple. Of course torture is unacceptable. No it's clear answer they are unacceptable. But how can I develop the topic. How can I fill the post with approximately one thousand words. Tell me guys.
Let's discuss with imaginable guy inside me who are so crazy enough that contends opposite notion. He assumes that what a stupid topic, of course torture is acceptable. More over he assert that torture is recommended to use kindergartens, schools, offices, military, police station and prisons etc. Because the torture is a key of society development. It's impossible to imagine our mankind without tortures. Person's body is lazy by its nature. That's why we sometime do need to propel it to move and good punch is that engine which urge.
Torture is not the same as punishment or occasional punch. Torture is enormous pain caused by one person deliberately to another person in order to reveal some information or obtain result.
Torture is a pristine way to resolve the problem. I guess it's sometime emotional issue of the person.
Let's look where tortures more often used to apply. At war. Doesn't matter is it war between countries, or war between police and gangsters, or war between government and opposition.
So why person use torture against another person. Is it part of person mind or is it illness which we do need to eradicate from society by torturing bad guy who use torture in the life. We people life on constant war with each other. Our nature is to tend to improving our prosperity. Well-being is a key for rivalry that we people scattered around the globe and a thousand years history. We tend for longing for better life than another person. From this time begin competition which turns into rivalry which turns into confrontation which turns into opposition which turns into conflict which turns into animosity and which finally turns into war. Low of was: don't feel sorry for your enemy because he won't be sorry for you.
349 words.
Let's discuss with imaginable guy inside me who are so crazy enough that contends opposite notion. He assumes that what a stupid topic, of course torture is acceptable. More over he assert that torture is recommended to use kindergartens, schools, offices, military, police station and prisons etc. Because the torture is a key of society development. It's impossible to imagine our mankind without tortures. Person's body is lazy by its nature. That's why we sometime do need to propel it to move and good punch is that engine which urge.
Torture is not the same as punishment or occasional punch. Torture is enormous pain caused by one person deliberately to another person in order to reveal some information or obtain result.
Torture is a pristine way to resolve the problem. I guess it's sometime emotional issue of the person.
Let's look where tortures more often used to apply. At war. Doesn't matter is it war between countries, or war between police and gangsters, or war between government and opposition.
So why person use torture against another person. Is it part of person mind or is it illness which we do need to eradicate from society by torturing bad guy who use torture in the life. We people life on constant war with each other. Our nature is to tend to improving our prosperity. Well-being is a key for rivalry that we people scattered around the globe and a thousand years history. We tend for longing for better life than another person. From this time begin competition which turns into rivalry which turns into confrontation which turns into opposition which turns into conflict which turns into animosity and which finally turns into war. Low of was: don't feel sorry for your enemy because he won't be sorry for you.
349 words.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)