i_love_burritos

I'm afraid I can't provide a source, you have to take my word. If there were negative kudos, I would give them to you. How2PK, you've tainted your reputation ! :shame:

And appearing as a right [puncture]. I'm not against benefits for families with children, even if the parents work. However, I am against how much more those without employment get. The can survive off it, and they have no incentive to get a job then. Plus, I feel we are not hard enough on those that claim disability benefits, mainly because of people who fake not being able to work. I have no problems with those who are actually disabled claiming, but it seems that claiming can be as easy as playing up a back injury and acting as if it is permanent. First off - calm down. My arguments against: The government spends far too much on these types of welfare. Just last year, the Australian government spent 40% of the budget - about $97,200 million on social security and welfare. This often leads poverty traps and reduces the incentives to work. Here, welfare recipients do not want to work at all. The incentive to work is lost. Instead of wasting taxpayers money - the government could enforce lower tax rates to lower income brackets. In the last few years the government has done this. Ill take Australia as an example in 2000 A New Tax System was implemented that encouraged people to work and offered them other incentives. Another package in 2001 had a different approach. It allowed people to obtain an apprenticeship, education or some form of training and only then, whilst working, they would receive ongoing support. Then again in 2006, there were more tax cuts and those who did work, even part time as it suggested in the policy was linked to welfare support. Why I ask you, is this not a better method for treating unemployment and disability. Since the late 90s the Participation Rate has been increasing and unemployment decreasing. Currently it is 4.25 [2008 before downswing]. If you do argue that the marginal taxation rate may catch up [wait, do you even know what the MTR is ?] on gross income, I argue against, because as of this moment the effective marginal taxation rate is, as previously mentioned, being reduced especially for low income earners through a series of tax cuts and bonus incentives Again, I ask you why wouldnt this system work ?

ohai there. ;D Ahaha'...ech...ohmygod. :anxious: Wongtong. Remeber this is a G-rated forum.

Woah, woah. Guys calm down. If it's any consolation I haven't been hit on by anyone before.

I say Welfare should be taken out of goverment spending totally. No one should recieve payments from the government. Regardless of their physical or mental condition. I'm playing the Devils' Advocate here.

I want to try making signatures like pat and ouchy and skully and littleboy. What do I need and could anyone direct me to some helpful links or tutorials for begginers ? [i've downloaded the GIMP if that helps] thanks !

Yeah. Too many checks make people complacent. Not good. Private sector also shrinks.

Does anyone else think that when viewed from a certain angle - Megan Fox looks like a transvestite ?

I love your signatures Wongtong Grumble.

Seeing as Off-Topic doesn't have a thread like this - What are your opinions on tax, redtribution of income, social security and generally all the saftey nets that the goverment implements to help its citizens. Do you think it is exploited ? Unnecessary ? Fair or unfair ? This includes eveything from public healthcare, taxation, housing and transport. Doll payments to those "unable to work" and parents with many children and those with low incomes. In my opinion it shouldn't be implemented unless heavily means tested and the recipient is part of the workforce. I'll elaborate and argue when someone disagrees with me.

[hide=Tasteless]On June 25th Farrah Fawcett died of cancer. As she ascended up into heaven she was met before the pearly gates by St.Peter - she of course, was let through. Now as is customary for good and kind person, like Farrah Fawcett God granted her one single wish. She said she wanted to make all the children of the world safe. The very same day, Michael Jackson died.[/hide]

Yeah, but I suck at that kind of stuff. It's not that I'm not too "artsy". It's that I don't have the proper tools or training/experience. That's why I skipped the bull**** and just answered your question. OK. :|

Coke (the drink, since some smart-[wagon] will probably make a comment) Yeah, Mage_Man0103 will totally... ech, better not get into it. I love reading and music. :thumbup:

Uhh. Guys, these photos aren't from the NASA feeds. They are actually from the internal agencies within NASA that catlogue star systems. This photo is taken directly from various space telescopes. [Astronomers use several telescopes from diffent distances and declinations to get a "overall picture"] Did you find my comment mildly amusing ?

Yeah, but I suck at that kind of stuff. It's not that I'm not too "artsy". It's that I don't have the proper tools or training/experience.

Haha. Yeah. ... :anxious: Another thing that annoys the hell out of me is : 14 year old private school chimps that act like apes on acid when they are travelling by public transport.

No. I actually travelled 6,496 light years to the Messier Cluster in my rocket ship, and by using my warp engine was able to get there in a few days. As for taking the photo, I made a modified version of Hessi and then because it can't process visible light - I converted into the 300nm - 800nm range. I did this by beaming it back to the Spitzer Telescope which then again turned into a digital format using CCD technique. As for getting back to Earth, I took a left on M16 and travelled through the nearest wormhole. Yes, I did all that. If you didn't realize by now, this is not all my own work. However I did create at least 60%. I copied the image from one of NASA's archives and then using some really complex and high-tech tools [paint and some other stuff] I fixed and enhanced the image by increasing the colour contrast, making it brighter, and better. I accented all the soft features and pumped up the sharpness. Happy ?

I guess people are entitled to their own opinions... You can't deny that trying to dye your own skin is weird? You wanna' try looking on page 7 ? I'll make it easier for you : I guess this was the main qualm : his life was pathethic ... his music rather crap Don't agree with you there. Especially on the second one.

Lookee my signature !

Uhhh... :anxious:

I guess people are entitled to their own opinions...

UNEDITED 1.) tripsis 2.) bini 3.) mrshinyredplanet EDITED: 1.) vadim 2.) tripsis 3.) Littleboy

5/10 kinda' "primitive"

I might have a solution. I think what you are wanting is a system where you can see your most recent posts. In that case; 1.) Scroll down to bottom of the page 2.) Click on your username - you should be on your profile page 3.) Under the sub-heading "Total Posts" there should be "Search users posts" That will bring up your posts in chronological order. Hope that helped. :thumbup:

Which do you think is better ? # 1 OR # 2 OR # 3 # 1 is currently my signature. I like them both and I can't decide. And they're both too big for a signature rotator [unless you know one that takes 100kb images] #2 and #3 are identical if not for the thicker border.