I meant within the law. Some practices should clearly be outlawed if we're going to have a civil society, and I think the government has some leeway to set policy there. However, if you are following the law, why should you be restricted as to where you are going to invest?

>> ^EMPIRE:
Because some investment are fraudulent, and some investments were created to cause harm on purpose to enrich others. How about that? That seems like a VERY GOOD reason not to let people invest in anything they want.
>> ^shinyblurry:
He pays the same tax rate, but there are fewer restrictions as to what he can do with the money. To which I say, so what? The taboo of off-shore accounts came from the fact that people were hiding money there, not that they weren't allowed to invest money there. Why can't people invest their money where they want to, where it is smartest to invest? Why do you think so many celebrities and business owners incorporate in Nevada? What right do you think the government has to tell people where they can or can't invest their money?
>> ^EMPIRE:
shinyblurry...
the people who created the legality of sending money into off-shore accounts are also some of the people who profit from the law being created. So, just because something is legal, it doesn't mean you should do it.
"he pays the same tax rate on that money as he does in the states." and "Yes, it gives certain tax advantages"
Well... what is it then? is it the same thing as having the money invested in the US or in an american bank or are there advantages? It can't be the two at the same time.

Because some investment are fraudulent, and some investments were created to cause harm on purpose to enrich others. How about that? That seems like a VERY GOOD reason not to let people invest in anything they want.

>> ^shinyblurry:

He pays the same tax rate, but there are fewer restrictions as to what he can do with the money. To which I say, so what? The taboo of off-shore accounts came from the fact that people were hiding money there, not that they weren't allowed to invest money there. Why can't people invest their money where they want to, where it is smartest to invest? Why do you think so many celebrities and business owners incorporate in Nevada? What right do you think the government has to tell people where they can or can't invest their money?

>> ^EMPIRE:
shinyblurry...
the people who created the legality of sending money into off-shore accounts are also some of the people who profit from the law being created. So, just because something is legal, it doesn't mean you should do it.
"he pays the same tax rate on that money as he does in the states." and "Yes, it gives certain tax advantages"
Well... what is it then? is it the same thing as having the money invested in the US or in an american bank or are there advantages? It can't be the two at the same time.

He pays the same tax rate, but there are fewer restrictions as to what he can do with the money. To which I say, so what? The taboo of off-shore accounts came from the fact that people were hiding money there, not that they weren't allowed to invest money there. Why can't people invest their money where they want to, where it is smartest to invest? Why do you think so many celebrities and business owners incorporate in Nevada? What right do you think the government has to tell people where they can or can't invest their money?



>> ^EMPIRE:
shinyblurry...
the people who created the legality of sending money into off-shore accounts are also some of the people who profit from the law being created. So, just because something is legal, it doesn't mean you should do it.
"he pays the same tax rate on that money as he does in the states." and "Yes, it gives certain tax advantages"
Well... what is it then? is it the same thing as having the money invested in the US or in an american bank or are there advantages? It can't be the two at the same time.

^ he's right on the money

it's the auspiciousness of the first fish of the lunar new year

at this time, most businesses in asian culture give out yearly bonuses* and as such people are generally flush with cash -- there's also a huge aspect of traditions which supposedly bring good fortune in the coming year, and likewise taboos to avoid

virtually everything costs more during this season: airline tickets almost double (if you can even get a seat); taxis add surcharges; most all hotels and restaurants are booked to capacity, etc

*to their asian employees (one of the few times it sucks to be a western 'barbarian' out here - typically no bonus, but you're stuck with the extra costs of the holiday)

>> ^quantumushroom:

Disclaimer: I like pr0n as much as the next dude and think hooking should be legal.
However, I hate the fascist dehumanizing element which seems to have become the standard, and hate even more the mainstreaming and glamorization of the pr0n "lifestyle" as legitimate theater.
Pr0n has its place, but if it's such a life-affirming industry then the "stars" wouldn't be drugging and drinking--and occasionally diseasing--themselves to death.
Pr0n is a useful poison; far less useful than other poisons. As for the rest of these clever comments, open mic night is on Thursday(s).

>> ^xxovercastxx:
>> ^quantumushroom:
The problem is "right and wrong" doesn't return after the camera stops, either.
You got an example of how Belladonna's wronged the world?



I actually agree with your general point, that porn actors are increasing being held up as some sort of role models for a glamorous, exciting life for people who want to get a kick out of breaking a fading taboo. However, pointing to porn is a generalisation, plenty of other entertainers are just as bad and there are those in porn who are fine, and the question was about Belladonna specifically, whose life we know nothing about (if I may presume!). Porn actors are probably statistically among the worst in terms of drug abuse and mental health, but I don't think individuals should tarred with this brush.

I am guessing the health/drugs stat, I think that's a fair assumption. Also, I assume you originally meant "right and wrong doesn't return" to be what's right and wrong for her (e.g. potential drug abuse), rather than how she'd wronged the world.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
Words are words.

Not to a bullied or harassed schoolchild they're not. Words are weapons to kids that age.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
The emotions they evoke are only hurtful if you let them be. i.e. mentally removing that taboo
Nice idea. Easier said than done, I think we could all agree? Especially for kids. I was told this so many times growing up but it's almost impossible to put into practice.

Nigger is not a common word.. but a race?! and our culture?!?!?! o_O?!

wtF?!

Words are words. The emotions they evoke are only hurtful if you let them be. i.e. mentally removing that taboo

That said, it's good that she spoke up about it. And it's even better she'll be returning to the team.

Your video, Jimmy Carr's Thoughts on Taboo in Comedy, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 23 Badge!

>> ^A10anis:

He says; "It's a joke, i wasn't being serious or trying to make a point."
I don't think Bill Hicks or George Carlin (to name just two) would be in that catagory of comedian. Their whole comic agenda was to make points about everything, whilst wrapped up in the guise of comedy.


You know what, I thought exactly the same thing. But then Jimmy Carr definitely isn't the type of comedian to sell you his beliefs, he just-tells-jokes.

I love Triumph, No target is taboo - take no prisoners!
... and giggle funny..

I thing it's a great thing to bring death back into our culture instead of the taboo that it is now, but she might want to finetune some of the fluff (e.g. the terrible opening music). In any case, promising series!

I see what they are doing here - and nothing is taboo in comedy - but making light of a serious/frighting situation is strangely wrong. The feelings/understanding we go through as we watch this is foreign to our sensibilities making it hard to discern what to think.

It's jesting that we should feel bad for the pedophiles and the slant of the skit puts us on the side of pedophile, which is a side we would never take. That's where this goes wrong and creeps us out. It puts us in the shoes of the violator which for most of us, is against our programing.

Sadly, I think you might be right.>> ^dannym3141:

So extremely well put. However, i fear it must be the generation that comes AFTER this one that will be the force for changing the law. Ok, we now (by majority) think pot is ok. But the generation after us (who we raise) will be even more comfortable with pot than we are, and the old people (us) will agree. I worry that only then will the taboo be broken.
Nevermind, i'll die an extremely happy, stoned old man.

Sadly, I think you might be right.

In reply to this comment by dannym3141:
So extremely well put. However, i fear it must be the generation that comes AFTER this one that will be the force for changing the law. Ok, we now (by majority) think pot is ok. But the generation after us (who we raise) will be even more comfortable with pot than we are, and the old people (us) will agree. I worry that only then will the taboo be broken.

Nevermind, i'll die an extremely happy, stoned old man.

So extremely well put. However, i fear it must be the generation that comes AFTER this one that will be the force for changing the law. Ok, we now (by majority) think pot is ok. But the generation after us (who we raise) will be even more comfortable with pot than we are, and the old people (us) will agree. I worry that only then will the taboo be broken.

Nevermind, i'll die an extremely happy, stoned old man.