if it was law that they have to have a door with an alarm then by all means, but i just dont see it.
surely it isn't necessary that every time some 13 y/o decides to go in and out of those doors (which is prob relatively frequently) that an alarm goes off and they have to empty every cinema while they check to see if the fire danger is real.

i feel sorry they got shot, but blaming the cinema is ******ed.

It doesn't work if people pick and choose every penny - all you get is inefficiency and selfishness. It works by voting for the party that best represents your views.

First, I disagree with the premise. Second, let's assume I accept it - you're saying that we should just leave them be and guarantee that they live that way. People should not be punished for having the bad luck to be born in a specific circumstance.

As for your detail, number of children and poverty is correlated but you don't have the causation right. People have lots of children when the economy is bad. They need to because many will die and children look after parents when they're older. You can tell this is the causation because when people immigrate to a richer country, their birth rates go down. When countries get richer, their birth rates go down.

Which would be great except that everyone dies and who picks the successor? How do you guarantee they're good willed too? If a dictator is good willed according to 55% of people and ****s over the other 45%, should we just let them and accept the 45% are going to get ****ed over?

Yes, let's just give the government as much power as they like. That's going to end well.

I know this isn't going to land right, but I have lived in China and I was less imposed by their rules than in Holland. I was told two things by my friends there; don't smoke weed or discuss Chinese politics publicly.

Sciolist; noone gets to choose everything, that was my whole point in the first place. What iCrush seems to be suggesting is that it is ok for them to decide what to do with MY money, but not how to improve general security (even though I 100% agree it doesn't help).

Second point; if a village can feed 100, but they have 500 inhabitants, the only proper way to the village being viable again is reduce the population size - cruel as it is in the short term.

Third; it is a hypothetical. Power corrupts, which is the biggest problem with my theory.

There are no villages - London doesn't produce its own food, neither does Amsterdam.

It comes from high yielding farms in the countryside in its, or another's country. You feed more people by making yields higher. In countries with very low yields, it's much cheaper to increase them than in ones like ours.

Somebody should not have a death sentence based on where they were born. We can change that and so we should.

Next, the reason you have money is at least partly down to where and when you were born too. Some of this is because of your government - your legal rights, the rule of law, enforced contracts, etc. They have a right to some of your money. They will also spend it more efficiently than you can on something like a fire fighting or police force (or development) because they can leverage huge economies of scale that you cannot.

So it isn't really a good solution is it?

Sir Winston Churchill

yeah, because the next logical step after airport body scans is full scale government-driven bondage.

You don't get there in one go, you get there in lots of small steps.

i know, but a body scan at an airport isn't one of those steps, imo.

And I think that a government able to force you to submit to getting naked pictures taken of you for the purpose of security theatre is one of those steps.

Sciolist do you have a small penis?

" You can tell this is the causation because when people immigrate to a richer country, their birth rates go down. When countries get richer, their birth rates go down."

Tell that to the morrocans in Holland. They don't understand that rule.

Oh look, racism plus misogyny plus now personal attacks. I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.

It doesn't change much in the first generation. It does in the second and third. You can see this in countries with a history of immigration - notably the UK. You can also see it in Germany with Turks, Sweden with Somalis, Spain with Moroccans, France with Algerians - to name the groups people most often take offence at.

it was a simple question?

Why is that question relevant at all to the discussion?

it would be a reasonable explanation why he's so against the body scanners.

Geez u guys took the penis question way too seriously. Btw, I love the activity in this thread.

Some discussions are ok, but ffs this is a pokertopic

It's a low content thread, not poker.

You have an unhealthy interest in my penis.

you have an unhealthy interest in body scanners.

Just put a big sausage down your pants before you go through the scanner. Problem solved.

You guys all suck.

I have a penis that's un-proportionality large to my body

goddammit this thread is AIDS

lolll

Good for you. I imagine it helps to advertise such things.