Never.
Or we can ask an even more sophisticated question like which of these two things was designed specifically for injury, i.e., a weapon.
And let me just hazard a guess: you’d prefer that teenage suicides be left out of consideration, right?
Yeah, and let those northerners and midwesterners fail like they’ve always wanted to.
Oh, wait…secede! You meant secede!
Boy, was that stupid!
Off to the destupization camp with you!
Yes, except for management in some cases.
I wouldn’t. I think it’s a stupid idea.
Show that there is a correlation between class and stupidity. Not education. Stupidity.
Here’s a few of the things I’d suggest:
- I’d order a massive shake-up of the Media, and a near prohibition on trivial celebrity gossip. Nobody needs to know who Celebrity A had lunch with or whether Celebrity B might be gay. It’s not important, it’s invasive of their privacy, and it needs to stop.
1a. All reality TV ends immediately, as does the creation of “celebrities” with no talent or skills (ie, people famous for being famous). No exceptions.
-
All book purchases are tax deductible.
-
Make it illegal to care about issues that don’t directly affect you personally. It’s not your concern if whales in Afghanistan don’t have enough hay for the summer.
-
Increased geopolitical education in primary and secondary schools. Students don’t need to know the name of every King of England or President of Argentina, but they do need to know where every country on Earth is, and ideally the name of its capital city.
-
The Corporate model gets a revamp so that as long as a business is making a profit, then the needs of the community come before the wants of the shareholders. Shareholders will be legally entitled to a fair and reasonable return on their investment, but companies shall not be allowed to fire staff or cut costs just to make a larger profit than the one they’re already making anyway, and shareholders are not allowed to whinge about this.
-
General Knowledge shall be lauded in the popular media. You don’t have to be the next Professor Hawking with a PhD in every subject ever, but you should have a fairly general idea how the world works, why so many countries have the British flag as part of their own, and why the US dollar is the world’s de facto currency (for example).
-
The US Electoral College shall be abolished and election campaigns shall run for (2) months only, with no “Flashy” or “expensive” ads permitted. Just the facts, not appealing to the lowest common denominator. Voting shall remain optional.
If you want to go with this idea, I’d suggest for making them exempt from sales taxes instead. Claiming dozens of $10-15 tax deductions per person would be more of a hassle than handling them in bulk via the bookseller’s (lack of) sales taxes. I also think it would be a bad idea to give the government the power to audit your book purchases under the pretense of an income tax audit.
So… to make people less stupid you propose thoughtcrimes and isolationism? :dubious:
Your “cure” seems to require turning the US into an authoritarian hellhole, and doesn’t focus effectively on the goal of making Americans less stupid.
The downside is that the sales tax on a book is nothing- maybe $5 at most. Not worth the hassle for the most part. But keeping your receipts and being able to claim all the books back at the end of the year? I think that would be worthwhile and workable.
Oh, you can “care” all you like about it, in that you can be interested in or even support it. But the rest of us don’t need to hear about it. So, no more Greenies or Chuggers pestering people in malls and getting people worked up over the Cause du Jour.
There’s a line between saying “You’re right, it’s terrible that the people of [Insert Third World Country Here] don’t have enough Xbox 360s to go around” and taking out massive TV Ad campaigns to get money off people and get them worked up over things they really don’t need to be getting worked up over.
Forgive me, Martini, but this is the stupidest list I’ve seen in quite some time. The idea is to DE-stupidize (or DE-supize, as per the OP’s ironic title.)
They cannot be both celebrated and ignored. They give up the bulk of their privacy when they *become *celebrities. And though their comings and goings might not interest you, they do interest a number of Americans, including smart ones. And what is a “near prohibition” anyway?
I’ll use my shotgun against your tanks if you try to end all reality TV. I happen to enjoy a lot of reality TV, as do many Dopers (see Cafe Society). Do you believe they’re all stupid?
Tax deductible? Why not a full-on tax credit? And what if they’re books about Paris Hilton? Do they count too? Doesn’t the media, mentioned above, include book publishers? What about political smack that is written by right-wing nuts and purchased en masse, in the thousands and tens of thousands, by right-wing organizations for the sole purpose of forcing the book onto the New York Times best seller list? Do they get a tax deduction for their purchases?
You might want to buy one of your tax deductible books. There are no whales in Afghanistan. Regarding issues that don’t directly affect you personally, why are you banning celebrity gossip and reality shows? Is your TV stuck on one channel, and plays only for a specific primetime hour? Can’t you watch National Geographic or whatever it is that turns you on personally, without making everybody else watch your boring crap?
And what else don’t they and do they need to know? Not every King of England, but what about every US President? And why are US presidents more important than Zulu Chiefs or Afghan Warlords? And do you know these things that you’re requiring everyone else to know? What is the country bordered on the west by Switzerland and on the east by Austria? No Googling, please. Googling is not tax deductible.
Does that include 401K and other retirement shareholders? And what is “fair and resonable” anyway? Did you know that quite often the shareholders and the community are one and the same? Ever heard of the Green Bay Packers? And companies are not allowed to cut costs to increase profits? That’s the dumbest part of the whole dumb list. Profits are what the company can bank. It can’t bank revenues. And what is it supposed to do with all that “dead stock” it has in inventory that it can’t sell? Normally, it would dispose of it, but that would decrease its costs. What is your proposal for what it should do?
Why on earth should anyone give a shit about the British flag? And frankly, I must question, given the evidence from your post, how much it reveals with respect to knowledge about “how the world works”. It would seem that there is little or none. From television to books to school to elections, your post seems to advocate interference in nearly every aspect of people’s lives. Why is that a good thing from anyone’s perspective but your own? As Lugwig von Mises has said, central plans are designed to benefit, not the people whose lives they affect, but the people who make the plans. It certainly seems true in this case.
What constitutes “Flashy” or “expensive”? How much money can people spend? And why would they campaign anywhere other than New York City, Los Angeles, and Houston, since the votes in Iowa won’t matter anymore? Were you not aware that the US is a federation of states, guaranteed individual sovereignty by the tenth amendment? Should we just dispense with the Constitution as well? You haven’t mentioned it, so it must be unimportant.
What hassle? With my suggestion there’s no keeping of receipts for 2-5 years and no entering all your $10-50 tax deductions on your tax return. You buy your book, the bookseller charges you $X instead of $X+Y, and you’re done.
I laughed.
Hi there, Xeno! Long time no see. Glad I could give you a good laugh. 
The thing is that the sales tax on a book in the US varies by State- some have none at all, and in others it’s around 7% IIRC. 7% of a $5 book at point of sale is no discount at all. But I’d like to think that knowing you can claim the entire cost of the book back the next financial year when you file your taxes- I think you’d see book sales skyrocket.
And Liberal, besides suggesting that your hyperbole-o-meter might need recalibrating (The “Whales in Afghanistan” thing, for example), all I’ll say is that you (generic you, not you personally) should really hope I never end up in charge of a country. Seriously, it would not be fun. Well, it might, if you agree with me, but most people don’t, for some reason. 
Of course, the wonders of democracy mean that I’ll never end up in charge of a functioning country anyway, so it’s kind of self-fufilling in that regard.
I cannot image why.
Let’s just say I’m a closet Megalomaniac and leave it at that.
Fair enough. I just think it’s a way for the government to say it encourages reading, without introducing other problems.
That’s not how tax deductions work. If you’re in a 15% tax bracket you only get back 15% of the price of the book, not the full 100%. I assume you’re thinking of tax offsets.
I’m in Australia, and the term “Tax deduction” here refers to anything you can claim the cost of on your taxes, wholly or partially.
Our tax system also works slightly differently to yours- the $ amount of your deductions are based on how much of the claimed item is for work use. Thus, if John Smith spends $100 a month on his mobile phone bill and 40% of his calls are business related (and he can prove it), he can claim $40 of each month’s phone bill for the relevant financial year. Similarly, if Sarah Johnson is required to buy a special work shirt from her employer (say, it has their logo on it), then she can claim the entire amount on her taxes as a deduction, being a wholly work-related expense.
Thus, in my suggestion, people could claim 100% of the cost of any books purchased in the financial year on their taxes, regardless of whether the books were for work or personal use.
I am also in Australia and I’m telling you that you’ve misunderstood how a tax deduction works.
When you claim something as a tax deduction you don’t get back the full amount that you claimed. In your example John Smith doesn’t have to pay income tax on that $40, but he doesn’t get the whole $40 back from the ATO.
Perhaps I’m missing the joke. There’s one obvious answer and two acceptable others, as far as I can tell.
I don’t know about relevant Austrian or American tax code, but in Canada there’s a distinction between a “refundable tax credit” and a “non-refundable tax credit”.
Though just classifying books as non-sales-taxable is much easier.
I’m pretty sure neither Italy nor Germany would be acceptable answers.
What struck me as funny is that this followed The Tao’s Revenge’s earlier comment about finding Liechtenstein on a map. Not a thigh-slapper really, or even a joke, but I chortled all the same.
Your mileage, etc.