Politics

[Xriqxa]

What is a Kim Jong-un?

[phinehas]

https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/134479?hl=en

[Xriqxa]

Thank you for your clear and well thought out answer.

[tuto99]

"You have a point, but you don't need to call other people ignorant, dumb, or crazy to tell a point."

Actually I did.  If I didn't you would not have experienced the contrast nor the emotion otherwise.  You would have no long term empathy for the people you are calling stupid and crazy if you had not experienced the shoe being on the other foot personally.

Edit:  I am using the term "You" generically to cover those who made the comments and not you specifically.

Edit:  Actually I didn't.  I didn't have to use those words and tone and I could have proved my point and hopefully changed attitudes on the communication by a different way.  You are right.  I am sorry and let me know if I slip on this matter.

I appreciate the empathy. It's frustrating when someone insults others; it adds unnecessary tension and a whole lot of negativity. I don't mind if you have strong beliefs, that's not my problem, but I was just sitting here looking at your posts and seeing the bluntness of your wording.

[Bla]

Interesting. 31% of people above 16 years in the Copenhagen region were doing voluntary work without wages in 2004, and the number has been increasing, in 2012 to 38%.
In the sport clubs the value of voluntary work was worth 17 billion DKK per year in all of Denmark, and the total value of all voluntary work (including sports and others) was estimated somewhere around 130 billion DKK in Denmark in 2004, and has been increasing since then. For comparison, the state budget of Denmark is around 630 billion DKK.
350,000 people in the sports sector (the vast majority) work as volunteers.

The public sector is increasingly working together with the voluntary sector, for example there are a lot of people assisting the firefighters, so many that they've had to reject people because they couldn't offer them all the necessary education. There were also young people helping people in nursing homes, and people arranging trips for children in asylum centers. And people working in recycling centers and centers selling used clothes, were the surplus goes to relief.

Source: TV2 Lorry regional news for Copenhagen.
http://www.tv2lorry.dk/arkiv/2013/12/10?video_id=85805
http://www.tennis.dk/Sektioner/Klubudvikling/Tennisseminar/~/media/Files/Klubudvikling/Tennisseminar/2013/Jan%20Gudnitz.ashx

Edit: Fixed some facts which were listed as regional rather than national statistics (sorry, I got them mixed up from when I saw them in tv because it was a regional program and have re-watched the program and looked up the numbers elsewhere), and added more facts and additional clarifications and bolding to help people understanding the post.

[Darvince]

holy shit that's a lot

[phinehas]

I didn't realize poor people in Denmark were really just in need of soccer, go figure, I thought it was food, shelter, clothing and training for jobs.  I guess if you are good enough you can football your way out of poverty...but man I don't think those odds are very good.

[vh]

the voluntary work in sports clubs doesn't mean the voluntary work was sports.

no claim was made that you can

football your way out of poverty

[Bla]

the voluntary work in sports clubs doesn't mean the voluntary work was sports.

One of those interviewed in the sports clubs said it helped her in her pedagogy studies to be a sport teacher.

With that said, the sports make up 17 billion DKK of the voluntary work while the total worth is over 130 billion DKK, luckily it's not all sports, the sports sector just happens to be pretty much volunteers only.

[phinehas]

the voluntary work in sports clubs doesn't mean the voluntary work was sports.

no claim was made that you can

football your way out of poverty

I took the post in question to be some attempt to counter the post I made in another thread...that showed people in the U.S.A. give more (substantive, like money..for substantive things poor people need) to help poor people than in other countries.  So, it's nice and all that people are volunteering at sport clubs, which somehow isn't related to sports...so if not, what is it related to and how does it help poor people in Denmark. 

Grasping at straws, perhaps it keeps poor kids off the streets from committing crimes that uses up more tax dollars than otherwise..idk.  Somebody will have to tell me because of right now, it just seems like people volunteering to coach non-poor kids and in return they get help with their own education...so again, don't see the poor benefiting from all this Denmark philanthropy.

[vh]

maybe they don't have that many poor people

[phinehas]

I guess...but then again, it's easy to simply look up facts.

http://cphpost.dk/news/poverty-on-the-rise-throughout-denmark.2832.html

But hey, this guy from Mexico says, suck it up.

http://it-is-a-great-day-in-denmark.blogspot.com/2009/07/who-is-poor-in-denmark.html

[vh]

rising poverty doesn't mean higher poverty.

[Bla]

I took the post in question to be some attempt to counter the post I made in another thread...

The post in question was an urge to share some statistics I found interesting when watching the news while visiting my grand mother today. You can take it as an attempt to counter whatever you want and make as many arguments you want based on that. It wasn't.

[phinehas]

rising poverty doesn't mean higher poverty.

I'm pretty sure the meaning of the word rising, in the context of economics, means the same thing as higher.  If poverty is rising then it has to be higher than it was previously.

[phinehas]

I took the post in question to be some attempt to counter the post I made in another thread...

The post in question was an urge to share some statistics I found interesting when watching the news while visiting my grand mother today. You can take it as an attempt to counter whatever you want and make as many arguments you want based on that. It wasn't.

Ok, sure.  If it wasn't related to the other topic, then all my points on it are unrelated as well.

I'll have to read up more on the Denmark "asylum" program...he..he, seems chock full of logical thinking.
http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/asylum/conditions_for_asylum_applicants/obligation_cooperate_concerning_accommodation.htm

The food allowance program

If an asylum seeker does not live up to the obligations specified in the Danish Aliens Act, the Danish Immigration Service can place him/her, and his/her family, if applicable, on the ‘food allowance’ program.

The program is primarily intended for asylum seekers who have received a final rejection of their application for a residence permit, have not left the country by the set deadline and are refusing to assist the police with the departure process.

Wow.  A whole country *****-whipped.  LOL.

[vh]

rising poverty doesn't mean higher poverty.

I'm pretty sure the meaning of the word rising, in the context of economics, means the same thing as higher.  If poverty is rising then it has to be higher than it was previously.

if the poverty of A starts at 0 and rises at 0.02 per year
and the poverty of B starts at 0.1 and rises at 0.01 per year
then at the current time t = 0, B has a higher poverty rate

[phinehas]

rising poverty doesn't mean higher poverty.

I'm pretty sure the meaning of the word rising, in the context of economics, means the same thing as higher.  If poverty is rising then it has to be higher than it was previously.

if the poverty of A starts at 0 and rises at 0.02 per year
and the poverty of B starts at 0.1 and rises at 0.01 per year
then at the current time t = 0, B has a higher poverty rate

What are you even arguing...the poverty rate of A rises and means it is higher, just like B.  If the rate of your poverty is lower but rising, then your poverty is getting worse..sheesh.

[vh]

i said

maybe they don't have that many poor people

implying that denmark has lower poverty than america.

you replied with the article about the rising poverty rate and

I guess...but then again, it's easy to simply look up facts.

the 'but' implies you think i was wrong, and that the article proves so.

but the article does not prove my point wrong. it only shows that denmark's poverty rate is getting worse, but it doesn't show that denmark's poverty rate is worse than the us'

[phinehas]

That would only be valid if I had in fact made a comparison between the two countries in that regard, which I didn't.  So when you said something about Denmark not having many poor people, I gave evidence showing the number and that the number is rising. Got it.

[Xriqxa]

Boom chiki chiki boom chiki boom...

[Xriqxa]

I expected 90 anti-spam posts...

[Dan Dixon]

From 1977-2007... 60% of national income (in the United States) went to the top 1%.

This is why it's okay to tax those that have more than they need and give it to those that don't.

In fact... redistribution of wealth is required for a health society (and especially given that inequality is "probably higher than in any other society at any time in the past, anywhere in the world").

http://billmoyers.com/episode/what-the-1-dont-want-you-to-know-2/

[Bla]

So May 1st is coming up soon and it has been announced that the prime minister will speak in Copenhagen. Some people have planned a noise protest at her speech with whistles in order to disrupt her speech. I find their arguments for why this action should be held very good. The media has been whining last year and this year about how this action is violating the prime minister's right to free speech.

But the prime minister is followed by the press wherever she goes and can always make a public statements if she wishes to, while the students, teachers, jobless and other groups that have been angered by her government's politics do not otherwise have this opportunity to speak out. We have carried out demonstrations, like the one against the sale of Dong, made petitions collecting hundreds of thousands of signatures, seen in opinion polls how the vast majority of people were clearly against it, only to be ignored by the government. I think it is only fair to then use Arbejdernes Internationale Kampdag properly for showing resistance against the hypocritical social democratic government rather than giving them another free ticket to May 1st, an event where they've proven clearly that their party no longer belongs at, a great disappointment given their many historical struggles and important victories for people in Denmark.

However, I've just seen that a parlament member of Enhedslisten is publicly opposing the action, calling it "dumb to prevent speakers from speaking on May 1st". Last year the government laughably blamed Enhedslisten for the action (they were probably pissed over seeing that at least Enhedlisten's speeches didn't get disrupted by angry people, kol).

What do you people think? Do you think the action is or can be justified?

Here are some videos of the events from last year. The prime minister fled to hold a speech in Ã…rhus and instead left the social democratic mayor of Copenhagen to speak there, probably a smart move for her kol, and many speculated it was because of the public anger, but this year she's actually going to speak in Copenhagen. The last year speech in Copenhagen was successfully interrupted for a while. (Besides from that, the mayor in Copenhagen actually had written an okay speech mentioning many results achieved in Copenhagen unlike the prime minister who just kept spewing out vague stuff and values in no way reflecting her government's actions in reality).

The prime minister in Ã…rhus:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX7l3cccTP0

The mayor in Copenhagen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmM28vNcvr8

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '121074'.

[Xriqxa]

Thanks for pulling the topic away from argument.

Well done guys.

[Darvince]

life is the longest NS issue ever

[phinehas]

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation

-rockstar

[atomic7732]

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation

-rockstar

Those are basically just 2 points. 3 of them are irrelevant (2, 3, 5) because they are not how socialism works at all, which you continuously fail to understand. 1 and 4 are wrong because "You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity."... like I don't know if you know math but, if you take money from people who have a lot and give it to people who don't have as much to the point that they are equal... then obviously the standard of living would have to be worth less than what everyone has, else everyone dies, or, alternatively you realize that money is an abstract concept that is only backed because everyone agrees to it, and they can stop agreeing at any time they want.

[phinehas]

You have failed to show any of the points are not valid and true.

Watch the numbers...
http://www.usdebtclock.org/