Should we impose a white privilege tax?

[-1=e^ipi]

It has been suggested that in order to help fight racism, reduce white privilege and help oppressed 'visible minorities' that white people should pay an additional 1% of there income in taxes.

What do you think, should such a tax be implemented? Should we also have a male privilege tax or a straight privilege tax in order to fight the heteronormative patriarchy?

[kimmy]

Mark Dice? Really, e^pi*i? You want to associate yourself with a kook like that?

Or perhaps I'm just being microaggressive towards Mr Dice because he's a white male.

-k

[WestCoastRunner]

What a stupid thread.

[Moonlight Graham]

Racist idea if I ever heard one.

[-1=e^ipi]

Mark Dice? Really, e^pi*i? You want to associate yourself with a kook like that?

I don't really know the guy's videos. Looking at his channel, he seems to be some sort of Illuminati conspiracy theorist or something.

[WestCoastRunner]

I don't really know the guy's videos. Looking at his channel, he seems to be some sort of Illuminati conspiracy theorist or something.

If you don't really know this guy's videos, why would you even post them and initiate a thread without some sort of research? This just demeans the quality of this forum. Provide some sort of legimate narrative we should respond to.

Edited September 3, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

[-1=e^ipi]

Racist idea if I ever heard one.

No see, the best way to combat racism/sexism/etc. isn't to treat people equally under the law and as individuals, as people like Martin Luther King Jr. or Morgan Freeman would argue.

The best way to combat racism is to treat people differently based on race/sex/etc. and define them based on this group identity, rather than treat them as individuals. So this means have institutionalized racism/sexism to combat racism/sexism and to have politicians and the media perpetuate identity politics. That's how progressivism works.

Edited September 3, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[-1=e^ipi]

If you don't really know this guy's videos, why would you even post them and initiate a thread without some sort of research?

1. I stumbled upon the video randomly.

2. The guy's opinions on other issues doesn't somehow demerit the content (which is primarily seeing if other people would sign the petition). The majority of people shown chose to sign the petition.

This just demeans the quality of this forum. Provide some sort of legimate narrative we should respond to.

Should there be a white privilege tax? Should there be a tax on male privilege? How is this different from say a university choosing applications based on race or the government of Canada and its employment equity policy? There is plenty to discuss.

[-1=e^ipi]

With respect to a male privilege tax, it is well known that the labour supply elasticity of women (0.5) is higher than that of men (0.1). So one could make an interesting economic argument that it is social welfare maximizing to have men have a higher tax rate than women.

[The_Squid]

idiotic thread...

[Bonam]

idiotic thread...

How so? -1 has simply taken the ridiculous ideas that circulate in social justice (SJ) circles about how to combat white privilege one step further to point out the absurdity. Many of the ideas now treated seriously by the SJ movement would have been considered universally ridiculous just a decade ago (like for example the idea that only white people can be racist, which is now a fundamental pillar of SJ ideology). Sexist fees are already imposed on males because of their "male privilege"(alimony & child support), and frankly I'd be surprised if a tax on whites doesn't become a serious proposal from SJ circles within the next decade or so.

Edited September 3, 2015 by Bonam

[Black Dog]

How so? -1 has simply taken the ridiculous ideas that circulate in social justice (SJ) circles about how to combat white privilege one step further to point out the absurdity.

Yeah and that's why it's a dumb thread. It's premised on a logical fallacy. It's like proposing sending refugees to gas chambers as a means of making immigration opponents look bad.

Many of the ideas now treated seriously by the SJ movement would have been considered universally ridiculous just a decade ago (like for example the idea that only white people can be racist, which is now a fundamental pillar of SJ ideology).

Other popular ideas today that were once thought ridiculous include: women are people, blacks should not be slaves.

Sexist fees are already imposed on males because of their "male privilege"(alimony & child support), and frankly I'd be surprised if a tax on whites doesn't become a serious proposal from SJ circles within the next decade or so.

Retrograde divorce and child support policies are bound up in old ideas about women's abilities to support themselves and their natural superiority in raising children.

There is no ideological feminist commitment to either of these discussions in the way there is to, say, abortion rights, or workplace equity. On the contrary, the alimony and custody inequities we have at the moment seem mostly based, not on progressive feminism, but rather on the reactionary image of female domesticity that feminism has spent most of the last 60-odd years fighting against. - link

So yes, sexist, but not for the reasons you and your MRA buds think. Unfortunately far too many MRA advocates for divorce/custody reform are actually just plain deadbeats.

[Canada_First]

Should we impose a black crime tax since most if not all the ghettos in Toronto are overwhelmingly black majority?

After all the blacks in the ghettos are the ones doing the drug dealing and the shooting. Whites in Toronto shoot like 5 people a year compared to 50 plus black murderers a year.

[Canada_First]

Yeah and that's why it's a dumb thread. It's premised on a logical fallacy. It's like proposing sending refugees to gas chambers as a means of making immigration opponents look bad.

Other popular ideas today that were once thought ridiculous include: women are people, blacks should not be slaves.

Retrograde divorce and child support policies are bound up in old ideas about women's abilities to support themselves and their natural superiority in raising children.

So yes, sexist, but not for the reasons you and your MRA buds think. Unfortunately far too many MRA advocates for divorce/custody reform are actually just plain deadbeats.

So you agree that only whites can be racist?

[Black Dog]

So you agree that only whites can be racist?

I'd explain the nuances of the theory to you, but I'm afraid I'd be wasting my time on someone who, let's face it, doesn't seem to capable of handling nuance.

[Canada_First]

I'd explain the nuances of the theory to you, but I'm afraid I'd be wasting my time on someone who, let's face it, doesn't seem to capable of handling nuance.

So you're saying that yes only whites can be racist. We'll I respectfully disagree. I've lived it. Trust me blacks hate whites a lot. But of course this is ok.

[Black Dog]

So you're saying that yes only whites can be racist. We'll I respectfully disagree. I've lived it. Trust me blacks hate whites a lot. But of course this is ok.

No, I'm not.

[Canada_First]

No, I'm not.

excellent. The news is good.

[cybercoma]

No, I'm not.

Understanding how power and racism are related is really difficult for some people apparently.