|
Darkest Auer posted:Because they take a stereotype and exaggerate it to a comic degree. And, importantly, because it's humor, not news. I wouldn't laugh if I saw a pohjanmaalainen waving a knife around on the evening news, but if it's satire then it's funny because it isn't real. Ah, but satire is (usually) based on reality. I could be forgiven in thinking Finns are violent knife waving drunkards if I saw a satire of a usual Finn on television. Because it has to be based on something to be called satire.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:52 |
|
|
Rexroom posted:Ah, but satire is (usually) based on reality. I could be forgiven in thinking Finns are violent knife waving drunkards if I saw a satire of a usual Finn on television. Because it has to be based on something to be called satire. It is an exaggeration of a real thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:It is an exaggeration of a real thing. Yes, you are right on that. But still, if I have never met a saame person in my life and some television sketch depicted them as drunkard fools, how am I supposed to know where the exaggeration starts? All I would get from that is that saame men sure like alcohol, and are of dubious nature. Is it then "only" humor?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 10:59
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Yes, you are right on that. But still, if I have never met a saame person in my life and some television sketch depicted them as drunkard fools, how am I supposed to know where the exaggeration starts? All I would get from that is that saame men sure like alcohol, and are of dubious nature. Is it then "only" humor? Well, first thing would be to not take television comedy shows as hard facts, so yes, it would be nothing but humor (and less funny to you because you wouldn't know why they're being depicted as such).
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
I'm the one on the right
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
triggered
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I said they don't really harm anyone. You never told me why they harm anyone, which was what I am asking you. How does nunnukanunnuka cause grief in any way we can quantify apart from some Apu-artikkeli from the 2000s and people being offended? If children getting bullied at school by using the ethnic mockery they learned from those sketches isn't grief then I'd like to know what would you qualify as grief? Without that qualification this discussion isn't really going anywhere and is pretty pointless even by the standards of this thread. Ligur posted:Jokes are funny. Some jokes are funny to some people, not to some other people. I am not exploding in mirth when I see jokes about sami just because they are about sami. I smile if they are funny in some way. Just learn humour or something. A joke about sami is not automagically fun because it's about sami, for example, if it has some funny in it then.... gaahhh. How can you even explain to humour to someone who (pretends) not to uderstand it? You don't have to explain abstract consept of "humour". I just want to know why you think they are funny. What are you laughing at? Ligur posted:Who gives a poo poo. Don't you ever get tired to this jaded and cynical internet person image? Speaking of humour, this is some funny poo poo right here 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Fish of hemp posted:If children getting bullied at school by using the ethnic mockery they learned from those sketches isn't grief then I'd like to know what would you qualify as grief? Why do you find that funny? What are you laughing at? What if children are getting bullied at school because of your image?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Hey GP, here's a challenge: I'd like you to try and defend every single tax evader who is exposed by the Panama papers. Tell us how they're blameless and it's actually taxes that are the real theft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Hey GP, here's a challenge: I'd like you to try and defend every single tax evader who is exposed by the Panama papers. Tell us how they're blameless and it's actually taxes that are the real theft. for every tax euro that you hide the current government has one less euro to give to kepulians?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Hey GP, here's a challenge: I'd like you to try and defend every single tax evader who is exposed by the Panama papers. Tell us how they're blameless and it's actually taxes that are the real theft. I'll help http://yle.fi/uutiset/jokainen_voi_tehda_rahoillaan_mita_haluaa__tassa_veronkiertoskandaalin_kootut_selitykset/8786421
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Why do you find that funny? What are you laughing at? What if children are getting bullied at school because of your image? Because it's the classic emperor has no clothes -situation. Man of wealth and power who is dealing moral judgment on common people is actually revealed to be an agent of immorality. This juxtaposition creates humour. Not really that difficult to see the funnee, so if you tried to be a witty and sarcastic internet poster, you have failed spectacularly. Or you were just really dumb. Either way, you can do better. And I'm pretty sure those kids won't be bullied anymore once their dad cleans his act so it's all up to him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Fish of hemp posted:Because it's the classic emperor has no clothes -situation. Man of wealth and power who is dealing moral judgment on common people is actually revealed to be an agent of immorality. This juxtaposition creates humour. Not really that difficult to see the funnee, so if you tried to be a witty and sarcastic internet poster, you have failed spectacularly. Or you were just really dumb. Either way, you can do better. You do realize that Nordea is not a person, but instead a company employing tens of thousands of people, right? The guy working in the Economics team of the Research Department of Nordea has absolutely nothing to do with the Tax Structuring team in the Private Wealth Management department, other than sharing a common employer. Not to mention saying Finland needs more cuts is not a "moral judgment on common people." Just as you have taken a shared trait (employer) to make a joke, many others take a trait (race, religion) and make a similar joke. Both can be funny, just because you have a stick up your butt about race (some people might have a stick up their butt about employer) doesn't mean everyone else does. Herman Merman posted:Hey GP, here's a challenge: I'd like you to try and defend every single tax evader who is exposed by the Panama papers. Tell us how they're blameless and it's actually taxes that are the real theft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
paljastukset oli suhteessa hypeen melko paskoja 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:The guy working in the Economics team of the Research Department of Nordea has absolutely nothing to do with the Tax Structuring team in the Private Wealth Management department, other than sharing a common employer. Do you really, really believe that Kangasharju had no idea at all what was going in the Private Wealth Management department? Maybe he didn't, but if he did, he knowingly has made hurtful propositions that could have been avoided if his employer had worked differently. Geriatric Pirate posted:Not to mention saying Finland needs more cuts is not a "moral judgment on common people." Why do we need cuts? Because common people are lazy and don't work hard enough. That's what I've been told. Geriatric Pirate posted:Just as you have taken a shared trait (employer) to make a joke many others take a trait (race, religion) and make a similar joke. Well here's the thing. I made that joke because this man is part of an immoral organization that has made huge damage to our society and in its own part drives down our welfare and creates systemic crises that can destroy our whole economy. He can quit being part of that organization any time he chooses. In fact, if he says tomorrow that gently caress this noise and quits at Nordea, I'll take my words away and say that he is a man of moral character. Can Sami or Roma do the same thing to their ethnicity? These things aren't the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Fish of hemp posted:Do you really, really believe that Kangasharju had no idea at all what was going in the Private Wealth Management department? quote:Well here's the thing. I made that joke because this man is part of an immoral organization that has made huge damage to our society and in its own part drives down our welfare and creates systemic crises that can destroy our whole economy. Not that I'm going to bother with this much further as it's pretty obvious that now you're just making poo poo up to try to justify your position. You started out saying that making jokes based on group generalizations was wrong and blahblahblah, proceeded to make a hilarious group generalization joke and now you're coming up with dumb justifications as to why your generalization is hilarious but other people's are NEVER FUNNY. It's all about that stick up your butt. Ps: the proportion of Nordea employees in Finland who worked on Panama tax deals is lower than the proportion of gypsies in Finland who shoplift or of refugees who've been convicted of crimes
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
You don't think the leadership and shareholders of these companies aren't aware of these? The employees totally thought of this stuff themselves? Also some people might think that the fact that so many large companies and rich people are complicit in crimes and evasions is a call for more regulation and intensive taxation efforts, not less. Why is it that retirees and unemployed people don't deserve their government money despite actual fraud being vanishingly small, but the companies and millionnaires deserve it despite that fraud costing billions and billions on a monthly basis? Why are we cutting from the poorest in society when the rich aren't currently paying their fair share? Gypsies are touched by the same criminal law as anyone else. Right now those at the top operate on a whole different legal sphere, one that practically encourages tax avoidance, so rich Gypsies get to gently caress around with the law too. Shouldn't we wait until these loopholes are closed before touching public spending? EU loses an approximate trillion loving dollars to tax fraud and evasion. http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation/tax_fraud_evasion/a_huge_problem/index_en.htm http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-tax-vanrompuy-idUSBRE93B0KC20130412 Explain to me how that shouldn't be the priority and how that finance shouldn't be used instead of cutting from social spending and using taxpayer money which is taken direct from all the wealth of the middle class and poor to bail out banks? Even half a trillion could cover every EU austerity measure and then some. Or alternatively giant companies could cover their own loving expenses and we could do away with business subsidies to them. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Nauta posted:paljastukset oli suhteessa hypeen melko paskoja Agreed. Sports personalities are not exactly on my shitlist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:You don't think the leadership and shareholders of these companies aren't aware of these? The employees totally thought of this stuff themselves? quote:ALSO, DON'T READ MY POSTS, I AM A MORON BUT TOO STUPID TO KNOW IT. Basic reading comprehension would've saved your time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:You don't think the leadership and shareholders of these companies aren't aware of these? The employees totally thought of this stuff themselves? quote:Also some people might think that the fact that so many large companies and rich people are complicit in crimes and evasions is a call for more regulation and intensive taxation efforts, not less. Why is it that retirees and unemployed people don't deserve their government money despite actual fraud being vanishingly small, but the companies and millionnaires deserve it despite that fraud costing billions and billions on a monthly basis? Why are we cutting from the poorest in society when the rich aren't currently paying their fair share? Geriatric Pirate posted:Oh I'm absolutely against tax evasion like this. Can't wait to see you guys blow it way out of proportion (I suspect most of the "Finnish" people exposed in this scheme will have surnames like Rotenberg, Zabludowizc and Timschenko and everyone knows they're dodgy anyway) and moralize about fairness (as net recipients of government money) though. quote:Explain to me how that shouldn't be the priority and how that finance shouldn't be used instead of cutting from social spending and using taxpayer money which is taken direct from all the wealth of the middle class and poor to bail out banks? Even half a trillion could cover every EU austerity measure and then some. Or alternatively giant companies could cover their own loving expenses and we could do away with business subsidies to them. Geriatric Pirate fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Those poor plucky rich people, having to maintain society with their (non-hidden) wealth
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:Those poor plucky rich people, having to maintain society with their (non-hidden) wealth They're paying for the pills you should be taking
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
onko viinan hakeminen virosta moraalitonta
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:onko viinan hakeminen virosta moraalitonta Alcoholism in general is immoral anyway, so...
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Alcoholism in general is immoral anyway, so... eikö se ollutkaan suomalaisten geneettinen erikoispiirre jonkun journalistin mukaan
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:onko viinan hakeminen virosta moraalitonta Yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
ahahaha kuinka sattuikin sopivasti lötymään tälläinen artikkeli päivän lehdestä: http://www.iltasanomat.fi/matkat/art-2000001152269.html vittu mikä vässykkä, ei ihme että ne hävisi vietnamissa Hogge Wild fucked around with this message at 15:21 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Alcoholism in general is immoral anyway, so... Miten sairaus voi olla moraaliton 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Miten sairaus voi olla moraaliton Hahahahahahahaha How The gently caress Is Alcoholism Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away From The Bottle Like Nigga Stop Drinking Haha
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
 me irl when reading this thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:
Pödel is a lot like Oltermanni. You can't just have one slice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:The reason why taxes should be cut and simplified is purely practical, it will cut back on the incredible amounts of resources currently wasted on work that solely exists to avoid tax. :img-m-bison-yes-yesss:
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
If we had no taxes there would be no reason to avoid them, and criminals would save a lot of work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
What if we remove all forms of veronvähennys instead? That should cut down on evasion a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:If we had no taxes there would be no reason to avoid them, and criminals would save a lot of work. I think tripla ässät are working on it right now
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:If we had no taxes there would be no reason to avoid them, and criminals would save a lot of work. Most of the "tax evasion" you love to cry about is legal tax avoidance. Part of the problem is that people who have no understanding of taxes see something about Panama and have a preconception about rich people paying less taxes, and don't really understand just how few people had Panama accounts (and most of those that did, like Nico Rosberg or Kimi, don't even live in Finland). So you end up conflating illegal tax evasion done by a few people with (the much more common option of) intelligent people taking advantage of a complicated tax code better than you can.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
You're right, lets cry about the legal part too. Let's get rid of that, stuff like interest payments on debt being tax deductible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:I'm a (very small) shareholder in Nordea, and I certainly wasn't aware of all the tools they use, I know they help clients avoid tax, I assume they do it legally because the fines are so high for facilitating illegal stuff. Hey guess what, so am I! Do you really think that by "shareholder" I mean't every goddamn country bumpkin whose parents got them an account (like me) This is your problem, you still think big money and small money are the same thing. I really don't know why. Geriatric Pirate posted:Bingo! I guess? Why is it that people who are in the top 10-20% of the world's income distribution think that their "fair share" is to be net recipients in society? Anyway, all of that is just moralizing, my actual opinions on that lie somewhere in the middle, but it's just such a weak argument to make. It's actually a great argument to make. If you really think same laws and taxation means applying to same people regardless of how rich they are is "weak" the irrationality of your belief comes right through there. Until I have the option to route my wealth through Panama without being a millionnaire, millionnaires shouldn't have that option either. Simple as that. As an addendum you seem to think that I have no problem with the legal means to avoid tax which is weird as well. Geriatric Pirate posted:The reason why taxes should be cut and simplified is purely practical, it will cut back on the incredible amounts of resources currently wasted on work that solely exists to avoid tax. No, we should instead make all the work that solely exists to avoid tax illegal and prosecute the people who continue to do so after that. Why you would punish criminals by giving them what they want legally, or give freeloaders with special rules even an easier automatic avenue to pay as little as possible  Geriatric Pirate posted:Right now the Finnish system actually works well, in the sense that it doesn't make any sense to use Luxembourg companies etc. unless you are like an F1 driver or major entrepreneur. In other words, the Finnish system doesn't work well. Geriatric Pirate posted:Of course there are still many things that can be improved, especially on the corporate side though. Overall though the goal should be to make it make sense for people to not avoid tax. Here is an option that makes sense for people not to avoid tax - you go to jail if you do and have to pay the money back. Do you think that's just something everyone does? I haven't spent a single second in trying to avoid tax. Thousands of euros appear on my account every month. I'm happy with that. Geriatric Pirate posted:Once again, I could find the post where I showed that the top 10% of Finnish taxpayers pay something like 50% of income taxes, but I won't bother because you know that's the case and it's not the middle class who are paying (nor is it you), it's the Finnish rich (who this thread calls middle class, lol). Nico Rosberg and Gennadi Timschenko avoiding Finnish taxes doesn't make a bit of a difference. If you are trying to imply that I am not middle class, for the hundred time I am firmly in the upper middle class if you just take the poo poo I get from my family. I am not some poor student whining about my opintotuki nor have I ever claimed to be. So stop addressing me like I live on the society's tit or whatever. Also, you seem to have a simple math problem. Top Finnish taxpayers have more money so they have to pay more tax. Right now they have means to pay less money then they should, means that non-rich people don't have, both legal and illegal. We should make the legal means illegal and prosecute the illegal means with extreme prejudice. What problem is it that you have with equality? When have you ever heard anyone in the middle class whine about their tax percentage to anywhere the same degree as the wealthy are, despite ending up with less money? I'm also going to repeat a question that you apparently didn't seem to bother to answer: why is it that you continue to support austerity measures, when the rich aren't paying what they are supposed to pay? Why do we have to dip into the pockets of the people who pay 100% their legal taxes and don't engage in tax avoidance and are not given a chance of engaging it at anywhere close to same level, instead of people who engage in tax avoidance? Why is that the priority, and why do you support the political parties and policies that make it a priority? A straight answer this time, please. Also, how does this equal not "a bit of difference" keep in mind that this is just one area of economy: http://www.hs.fi/talous/a1456727363442 DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Apr 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:52 |
|
|
Incidentally I read a  blog post about the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. It's a bit UK-centric though, but cuts to the gist of the Panama thing.Anyway, some other news: The Sunny Car Center saga is reaching another conclusion when the city council of Hämeenlinna is going under a vote, where it might be broken up due to Also the government is apparently close to wrapping up their social and healthcare reform. It was so close today, that they even made the announcement for it until TF put a stop of it because of something, I don't care anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2016 19:15
|
|