same here. i was awful in high school, barely made it every year. the only reason why i took those classes was because they were the closest to my interests (languages) and the degree would offer the widest range of possible studies afterwards (in belgium we choose a direction in high school, usually like what we want to do afterwards, and this can influence your choices in university: if you pick a direction with a lot of languages and little math you will have trouble studying biology later on without taking extra courses. there are also technical or art directions in high school but the other classes they teach (math, languages, history) are more limited so afterwards it can be a struggle to pursue normal hiher education instead of art school or doing a technical profession. this is why i never went to art school in high school, i wasn't sure of what i was going to do afterwards and wanted to keep my options open.

anyway, i sucked at studying latin and all the rest (not because of being too stupid, it just wasn't interesting enough) and now... i'm doing pretty well.

We're not talking about war though, that is a WHOLE other topic and my opinions on tax dollars going toward that (whatever those opinions may be) have nothing to do with this specific issue. It's not an issue of "I do/don't support this so I can/can not support that"....Two totally different issues.

I feel as if either a) I haven't been explaining myself properly (and yes, I'm fully aware that even if I was, taken I'm not already, most here would still disagree with me, which is fine) or b) you + a few others who are reading everything I've said have a flawed interpretation. I'm not challenging wether some who have worked their asses off should get into school for free (these people often do, anyways...and not all are rich/receive private tutoring), I am simply stating that I personally do not want to see my tax dollars go toward ANYONE that wants to go. "Anyone" covers a fuck load of people, and I'm sorry...but there are a fuck load of people out there who I don't think I should have to help send to school. You said "even if a school is free it still requires certain things in order for students to be accepted"...GOOD! I SUPPORT THAT! Requirements can be a good thing, I feel some here would beg to differ. But then again, I feel some here would like to see tax dollars going toward buying cars for students that don't have transportation...because ya know, sitting at the bus stop in the cold or walking or living on campus can be such a drag.

I've just never had an "everything should be free" outlook on life....esp. when things might have an effect on other people.

Imagine a wage worker who could look down at his paycheck and see a number he could comfortably live off of, because the taxes taken from it were MINIMAL! If I had it my way, taxes would only go toward the necessary...and welfare would be VERY strict. Yes, there would be a lot of miserable, yet still able, people.

We have a certain individual talking about how "him and his people on the curb are in need of more crumbs", all the while talking about numerous shows he attends. This doesn't sound like someone struggling to me. I could be wrong....maybe he goes to all these shows for free.

Americans like to talk about the things they can't do. They like to put focus into all the poor people that can't afford college, all the while disregarding the MANY poor people that DO IN FACT GO. If one wants to better one's own life, one should be responsible for doing absolutely as much as they can. And of course, this DOES boil down a struggle sometimes. It does boil down to living off of Ramen and working and being tired all the time....but, people do it. We have to sometimes make sacrifices in order to make our own lives a little better in the long run.

All of this said, there are plenty of things I would like to see changed in order for it to be easier for the average AMERICAN to find work. Free school isn't one of them, sorry. But then (again), I could support that if it had STRONG stipulations.

Sway, whichever the case, your opinions are a tiny minority and don't count in reality. Don't spend many a sleepless night torturing yourself about the subject.

Well, this might be true...but reality already supports many of my opinions.

Sorry...

Oh I see.

yeah, you kinda dug yourself into a hole on that one.

Please help me out of it.

Lends a latex gloved hand.

I don't agree with Sway's views on this but they hardly represent a tiny minority. That governments are as reluctant as they are to openly endorse raising tax levels makes me think that far more people share Sway's position than oppose it.

no. if that were true, then the governments position would be dictated by the numerical average of peoples opinion. and its clearly not. thats the lie of democracy, and it's certainly not how things function in either the uk or america.

the reason they oppose tax cuts for the wealthy is because they are wealthy people. and their campaigns are funded by the wealthy who put them there to change laws for them and keep their taxes down.

actually, in the uk at least, the majority of people are angry and want higher taxes for the rich. but if you are rich you basically don't pay any tax, you can afford accountants to get round this.

that last sentence may sound overly cynical to many. the part were i said "if you are rich you don't pay any tax." i can only advise anyone not convinced of it to look into the matter.

there are a lot of americans who buy into ann rands bullshit and believe that if you just don't tax the rich then we will all get richer. they believe that the reason the free market doesn't provide riches for all is because regulation and tax stops this from happening. this is simply a delusion.

these people are opposed to tax cuts for the wealthy. they also live in a fantasy land were they take their own greed and monomaniacal selfishness as a virtue. so they complain about having to pay taxes, yet use public roads. they take whatever hand outs they can get, then whine about what their tax is spent on. they don't get that without the "evil" government, there would be noone to test their food for botulism. they believe in a fantasy were they can do EVERYTHING themselves, and thus then will have to rely on noone. in reality this is an impossible fantasy. the american dream in other words. pyschologicaly i'm sure its a reaction to the atomised isolated position the poor find themselves in in late capitalism, one in which the system is set up to basically work them to death, and they will never have enough money or make it rich. i'm sure you could write something serious outlining the illusions and underlying motives that give rise to it. as it is tho i'd much rather just watch swa go from whiskey fueled meltdown to whiskey fueled meltdown, and tesla end up decoding the patterns in his own faeces for traces of nanobots put in his food by the NWO.

traces don't come out when you shit, we ran quite a few highly scrutinous tests and i assure you tesla won't find them without cutting himself open

he's too afraid to do that. because he has a terrible suspicion deep in the back of his mind that if he was to cut himself open he would find inside another version of himself doing the same thing, cutting through from another dimension. and the other tesla would be smiling and waving menacingly, and would have this tattoo on his forehead:



usually at this point he wakes up in a sweat and has to listen to his preachers sermons to calm down the torment in his mind.

WE ONLI GET CANCER COZ WE WANT TO. SAVE URSELF WITH THE LIBERTARIAN SPIRIT!

raising tax levels NOW
for what balancing the currency of the pound?
and what for the benefit of income trough new technology?
THEN they are maybe also there to collect tax

anyway
i have to say they have great humour i like

MAKING no sense NOW.

anyway
not that i would expect otherwise

what is faster?
a.money
b.light
c.the future

d. calcification of your neural networks due to early on set dementia.

mine neural networks are gone
so i don't have that problem

accually i don't have any problem )
i love the love of life

that is what has been pissing me off so much lately.

americans are gripping about taxes, about unemployment, about stimulus programs, about deficits, about budgets and priority of funding.. But what has not made a SINGLE debate thus far, from either side of any aisle, is fuck the bullshit, why did we spend over $1 TRILLION on a war that quite frankly we lost and are losing, and why do we continue to sink hundreds of billions (probably more) a year on these war(s)?

If we just stopped fucking around out of pride and fear, then we would stopping wasting a decade on lost wars, and we could afford Reaganomics tax schemes (even if they don't ever work ;) ), public health care, frighteningly high incarceration rates, etc etc etc

These have been the first major US wars without a war tax to pay for it, with all the gripping about taxes and government spending, I am thoroughly convinced that Americans would end ALL war(s) in a heart beat, if it cuts into the Cadillac Escalde feria..

brother, give it up, the more you keep trying to explain, the more you keep revealing its all just sour grapes, which is fine, you have the right to be upset about whatever you'd like, but just don't expect the rest of us to somehow start to be convinced, as you only keep convincing us that !@#$%! was spot on :)

(ps.. go back to school alredy, jesus man stop taking it out on this thread!)

that's kind of it.
every government in the world seems to oppose progressive taxes.
it always seems to get to a certain degree that's like maximum tax rate which works really well to prevent any upper middle class from ever getting to the point that they could be really threatening.

they also like to make poor people believe they are not paying taxes, when in reality, VAT taxes and the like are way more significant the poorer you are.

and by the end of it they'll have everyone believe that the very thought of social mobility is a sin because what else could you fucking want when you have housing, food, health, education, shopping, shitty music and hobbies?

its kind of disturbing tho, the thought:

ill support the right to exploit because i could be the one exploiting one day.

(and if i don't i'm a loser)

Knox, you're so retarded. Put me on ignore again please.

yeah, that makes sense.

tuition hike approved 323-302

Mayday is going to be fucking murder this year. They've just had a crack at Charles and Camilla as well. Good on my student bredrin'.

Off with his head.

Royal car attacked in protest after MPs' fee vote

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.



Eyewitness chases royal car as it is surrounded by protesters, using mobile phone to capture the incident


University Funding



A car containing Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall has been attacked amid violence after MPs voted to raise university tuition fees in England.
A window was cracked and their car hit by paint, but the couple were unharmed.
In angry scenes, protesters battled with police in Parliament Square. Hundreds were contained on Westminster Bridge for a time by officers.
Police say 12 officers and 43 protesters have been injured, while 22 arrests were made.
Prime Minister David Cameron said it was "shocking and regrettable" that protesters had attacked the prince's car.
Clarence House said the royal couple were safe and attended the Royal Variety performance as scheduled.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said there would be a "very serious and very detailed investigation" into the disturbances, in which 10 police officers have been injured.
The vote will mean fees will almost treble to £9,000 a year. The government's majority was cut by three-quarters to 21 in a backbench rebellion. Three ministerial aides resigned.
Only 28 Lib Dem MPs - less than half - voted for the government's plans for tuition fees. Six Conservative MPs voted against.
Violent scenes There were angry clashes as protesters - some throwing missiles - fought to break through police lines.
Riot police had to force back protesters who were smashing windows of the Treasury and the Supreme Court.
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Click to play


Click to play







Ben Brown: 'It's been quite a battleground'

Earlier, protesters had largely taken over Parliament Square and pressed against lines of police in front of the Houses of Parliament.
Mounted police were used to control crowds, at one point charging a group of protesters, as thousands of demonstrators protested outside the Houses of Parliament.
Other reported actions taken by the protesters include:

• Setting the Christmas tree in Trafalgar Square alight
• Smashing windows at shops in Oxford Street
• Vandalising statues in Parliament Square, including that of Winston Churchill
• A sit-in by about 150 students at the National Gallery

Superintendent Julia Pendry said officers had come under sustained attack and condemned "acts of wanton vandalism, wanton violence" by protesters.

How the vote went

• 28 Lib Dem MPs voted yes
• 21 Lib Dem MPs voted no
• 8 Lib Dem MPs either abstained or were absent
• 6 Conservative MPs voted no
• 2 Conservative MPs abstained

In violent scenes earlier, the BBC's Mark Georgiou said there had been injuries to both police and protesters near to Westminster Abbey.
The Metropolitan Police said there were attacks using "flares, sticks, snooker balls and paint balls".
Home Secretary Theresa May said she "utterly condemned" the violence.
"What we are seeing in London tonight, the wanton vandalism, smashing of windows, has nothing to do with peaceful protest," she said.
"I have spoken to Paul Stephenson, the Met Commissioner, and he has updated me on the appalling levels of violence seen today.
"Attacks on police officers and property show that some of the protesters have no respect for London or its citizens."
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.




Theresa May condemns the "appalling levels of violence"

Students from around the UK gathered in London for a day of protests and a rally - with police expecting about 20,000 demonstrators.
The coalition government faced its first major backbench rebellion in the vote.
The BBC's Ben Brown, outside Parliament, said protesters shouted "shame on you" as news of the result filtered out to the crowd.
The package of measures will see fees rising to an upper limit of £9,000 per year - with requirements for universities to protect access for poorer students if they charge more than £6,000 per year.

wow.

the prince & his horse: why didn't the students tip over the car? would have been fucking hilarious. that prick's expense account (him, his whole family and all those fucking castles) could probably pay for a fuckload of student's fees.

oi oi

hey, I say let em have their castles and stop wasting so much money on war(s) and we can all just break even on this matter ;)

Why should the public subsidise what students spend most of their money on? We're talking drugs, booze, hookers and, of course, std clinic costs.

As they should, but that's despite the point.

But yes, I agree. Sort of.

I think you've missed the irony in his statement, given that he listed things that are all taxed to the hilt or, in the case of GUM clinics, paid for by the public.

I've used the NHS maybe three times in my adult life - why should I pay for old ladies who've broken their hips?

Why should you, Glice?

Because, American, there are some things that are necessities for the well-being of the populace. Health is one, education another. And until you have socialised healthcare you are not a modern democracy, you're a despotic hell-hole.

The reason we have to pay for peoples education is - get this - so we can have things like doctors and nurses and teachers and an educated, well skilled and intelligent populace. Things that are vital to the prosperity of all of us.

Of course you selfish idiots can only see the world in terms of short term self interest. Yapping on about what your taxes should and shouldn't have to pay for. Determined to stand in negative solidarity with every other poor person. So you can entertain some isolationist fantasy of self sufficiency? Or just so you can whine about anyone else who gets anything to make yourself feel momentarily better about the fact that you can't get everything you want. Who knows, who cares. You just sound like children screaming "Mommy! it's not fair! he got a free chocolate bar! I want one! It's not fair! If i don't get a free one then he can't get ANY! Noone should be able to get anything unless I can get it too!". You will settle for the satisfaction of seeing noone get anything if you can't get something. You think this is some sort of virtue. Please keep quiet. we are all sick of your voices. The only problem is that you can vote. Shame that.

Why should I pay taxes for families with spastic kids? I don't understand.

the republican who likes the stooges.

then if nobody is supposed to get anything, why pay taxes at all?
as I have to do it, IT BETTER BE to provide education and health for everyone - or what else?

Why should I pay taxes when I don't want to pay taxes? If nobody paid taxes, we would just build roads as we needed to. I could drive along in my car as a team of poor people laid tarmac in front of me. I would be able to pay them because I'd be rich. Because I wouldn't have to pay any taxes.