I would like to know how my hamster, who in his entire life has eaten about the same volume of muesli as I eat every morning, is depleting global stock levels. That's ludicrous.
I would like to know how my hamster, who in his entire life has eaten about the same volume of muesli as I eat every morning, is depleting global stock levels. That's ludicrous.
Eat your hamster and we'll find out just how much muesli he's been eating. Don't forget to throw in some salt.
Wait, OG paid $300 to have a hamster's jaw wired? That vet must have really been hardup for the cash. I can't see putting a little animal through that when they only live about a year or two to begin with.
That said, there are definitely people who go over the extreme for their pets, and I guess if they can afford it so be it. It's those that can't afford the light bill but buy a $2000 pooch who's so inbred they have a host of health issues that piss me off. Mutts are much better pets anyway.
And for fuck's sake. Always get your pet from a shelter! Let's get rid of these puppy mills. Disgusting the things people do.
I would suspect it's a bit more than that. But there are tons of hamsters in the world. What is their contribution besides expanding the market for aquariums, sawdust and food?Originally Posted by RandBlade
Health? Security? By the by, have you quantified and justified your contribution lately?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
What's the contribution of humans who are too ill to work? Should we get rid of them too?
Hope is the denial of reality
Humans =! animals? Are you a vegetarian?
You were arguing their economic benefit, not their legal or moral status. Tell us when you feel like sticking to an argument rather than moving the goal-posts around.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Dread, a large variety of goods consumed by people above subsistence level add very little to the economy. What's so special about animals?
I believe he will point out that most if not all such goods are probably taxed, though the same is frequently also true for commercial exchanges surrounding pet care and I doubt most of those goods have a 100% tax tacked onto them.
edit: Dread, since you were so kind as to put in your vote in your OP, let me put in mine. Introduce it as legislation and just try to get it passed.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
I'm not saying pets should be tax free (I assume they aren't now). I just think they should be treated like any other good, with the sales tax or VAT that applies.
Hope is the denial of reality
I'm actually arguing both. The legal/moral status of household pets is generally considered below humans and their economic contributions are minimal.
Here's where the argument breaks down, because in many ways our first world economies are entirely based on above subsistence-level consumption.
I'm actually arguing both. The legal/moral status of household pets is generally considered below humans and their economic contributions are minimal.
Here's where the argument breaks down, because in many ways our first world economies are entirely based on above subsistence-level consumption.
I've yet to hear a good answer why Dread thinks government should make these decisions for people.
Next we will be having government add a "fat tax" to unhealthy foods? Pfft. Big Brother at its worst.
Where do you draw the line Dread? What type of decisions should be freely made and what should be influenced by government?
And when we make replies on legal-moral grounds you respond in economic terms and when people have pointed out areas where we can see an economic return, you've challenged us in legal/moral terms. Get off the merry-go-round.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
I saw some information recently about some really cool work that therapy dogs have done with Iraq/Afghanistan vets suffering from severe PTSD.
I think we agree, then; this is all I've been saying in this thread. I don't think one 'luxury' item is any better or worse than another.
I'm not opposed to these luxuries either, though. I think people buy things because they feel they make their lives better, including pets. Why should I begrudge anyone that benefit, assuming they can pay for it?
Now I suppose what you're really getting at is that there's a negative externality associated with pet ownership. Yet I think the food example is pretty bad, since people pay for the food in a relatively open market, and there's not a fundamental scarcity of it that's keeping the poor of the world from eating (despite some recent supply shocks). Other externalities exist - such as owners who abandon pets or fail to sterilize them or whatever. But the solution isn't to discourage pet ownership, but to discourage the specific behaviors that are bad. Mandatory registration might not be a bad proposal, then, assuming pets could be easily identified from it.
This may be one of the most offensive posts you've made. I'm not sure, since you're very good at trolling.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Already a proposal for next year in the UK ...
Slightly ludicrous proposition, and I hope it doesn't come to pass.‘Fat tax’ could sting the UK as early as 2012
Local authorities have proposed plans to address the increasing levels of obesity which is prevalent in the UK.
Takeaway restaurants across Britain could be stung with a £1,000 ‘fat tax’ which would be spent on enforcing programmes which promote healthy eating among children.
The scheme is set to be launched in Oldham, where levels of obesity among children are higher than the national average, with one in four children living in the town suffering from obesity.
Kebab houses, fish and chip sandwiches and burger bars will be forced to pay the levy before opening publicly, along with High Street fast food giants like McDonald’s, KFC, Pizza Hut, Burger King and Dominos.
The decision has come following the shocking figures in the growth in obesity throughout the UK, with health bosses saying that the rise in fast food restaurants is partly to blame for poor eating habits among children.
Tam Fry, of the National Obesity Forum said “as the Government is doing very little so it may down to local authorities to take action and we would welcome a ‘fat tax’ on fast food joints – if they are going to cause the problem then they should certainly contribute to the solution.”
It has been proved that on average obesity reduces life expectancy by nine years, and is deemed as a catalyst to many life threatening illnesses.
Further measures have been made by other councils in Britain, including measures to ban takeaways opening within 400 metres of schools along with limiting the concentration of takeaways in town centres and shopping parades.
But the proposal has been condemned by many; business leaders said the levy would stifle economic growth and force restaurants to close, while takeaway owners fear for the future of their business.
One takeaway owner said “If the council charges £1,000 for each business then scores of people are going to go under.
“Maybe really fatty food shouldn’t be sold to primary age children but people should still be able to have a choice over what food they want to eat.”
If the plans are approved by the Government, then the ‘fat tax’ could be introduced as early as next year.
Is this an appropriate response to the problem of obesity in the UK?
Bunnnnyyyyyyyyyyyyy
My cats have a relaxing effect on me which will help me perform better in my NEW JOB which I will start on Monday.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
Fuck you're dense.
Since then others have also parroted the use of pets as treatment and stress relievers.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Perhaps I'm missing something, but what's offensive at all about abhorring a "fat tax"?
I don't quite see the issue here.
First of all, world hunger is a distribution problem and not so much an "amount" problem. Even if we got rid of every pet out there, the amount of food produced in the 3rd world would not actually rise.
Secondly, if we're asking "what does a pet contribute to the economy" then we could also ask "what does a MP3 player contribute to the economy". Because an MP3 player is nothing you actually need and which takes up precious energy, metals and crude oil to produce. Why a SmartPhone? Why the Internet? Why books?
You could virtually create such a question for almost any consumer good on the market out there - why do we have 50 kinds of bread? Why hundred kinds of soda? Why do we have soda at all?
Why do we have still beer? The reasons for needing beer have long since vanished, so we could actually do away with it, couldn't we?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Dread, the pet industry is huge. Many billions of dollars. Small animal vets, kennels, trainers, Doggie Day Care, groomers, even pooper-scoopers and dog walkers. Not to mention those little clothes and dog purses, and gourmet organic pet foods. Commercial pet food manufacturers use post-production scraps or remnants that aren't suitable for human consumption, pig hooves for chew toys, bedding material from wood shavings, cat litter pellets with compressed paper waste....so pets can be a good way to be "economical".
Pretty sure I paid an extra tax for my SPCA cats but would have to look it up. They had to be spayed, vaccinated, and chipped before adoption. It's the vet services that are expensive for pets. But even indigent people can have a dog or cat, and feed them scraps from dumpster diving. Having a companion pet can mean a huge difference for millions of people. Why would you take that away?
Which reminds me: Since when is Dread a socialist? I mean, I'm glad he's seen the light - but I think we'll have to steer him towards the more atrocious outcrops of capitalism.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
What was the contribution of Dragon Age II?
Or any of the other games I or anyone else have bought to which that is just the most recent purchase of mine. I have spent many thousands of pounds on computer and console games, I have spent probably less than two hundred on my hamsters, most of that going to the two cages I've had. Why were Mocha (my current hamster) or Spam, Mojo or Pepe (my deceased hamsters) contributing less than the hundreds of games I've bought?
What does Mocha do? He keeps me happy, makes me smile, makes my friends and family smile and has done for weeks. Actually he does far more than my copy of Dragon Age II which has only ever made me smile, and will only likely do so for a few weeks before I complete it/get bored.
Although I would second the query as to why Nessus has her panties in a twist over Lewk's comment. How is opposing a fat tax offensive at all, let alone "one of the most offensive posts" by someone you've apparently been offended by on multiple occasions.
Do you know what Lewk is referencing?
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
At the very least it is chance to "show and tell" the kiddies about certain realities, so yeah they can be cool.
The worst job in the world is better than being broke and homeless
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote