SURVEY: Gay Marriage--Good for Thailand or not?

[moontang]

38 minutes ago, oceanyachting said:

As this is a discussion about gay marriage in Thailand, please explain why so many are posting about US. You don't make any sense. Please let's have the Chinese laws as they are likely more relevant

 

The New Gay World Order reaches far across the borders of the US.  China?  Be careful what you wish for.

[CMNightRider]

2 hours ago, balo said:

There are several examples of same sex relationships in nature,.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals 

Why did you send me an article about animals sex life?  I'm not interested what you do with animals or with other men.  Common sense should tell you homosexual sex is wrong.   

[oceanyachting]

6 minutes ago, moontang said:

The New Gay World Order reaches far across the borders of the US.  China?  Be careful what you wish for.

I am inviting comparison with a country other than US which has absolutely no relevance in a discussion about marriage in Thailand.

 

[Logosone]

6 hours ago, The Barmbeker said:

Maybe re-thinking the tax-system would help?

Maybe having mega- companies like Amazon or Google pay taxes AT ALL mihght help?

Huh?

What do you say, Mr. Taxman?

Well, let's see, you have 12 million people over 65 in the UK.

 

You have to provide them with enough money to live on, pay rent, get very expensive hospital treatment.

 

Do let me know how you will do so without future taxpayers, without future pension contributors. And no, big companies and even rich billionaires do not have enough to pay this particular bill, I know that's a leftist fantasy, but unfortunately there's not enough billionaires to pay for all the poor, sick and old in the world. 

 

And of course Amazon, Google et al already pay taxes. Obviously any sane person minimizes their tax bill. We all pay too much tax, corporates included.

 

But the long and short of it is that you will not be able to restructure the tax system without future taxpayers.

 

Children are needed. They are the precious fuel that keeps all of society going.

 

Gay marriage, however, is not needed.

[oceanyachting]

gay marriage does not prevent people who wish to procreate from doing so. Same number of kids either way. Gay people will not have kids whether they can marry or not

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, oceanyachting said:

gay marriage does not prevent people who wish to procreate from doing so. Same number of kids either way. Gay people will not have kids whether they can marry or not

 

Well exactly, and because gay people can never have and will not have kids (perversions of science or parenting excepted) they will never contribute to the pool of taxpayers. So why give them the tax breaks, employment benefits, unemployment benefits, pension rights, inheritance advantages that marriage brings?

 

What do they bring to the table? Apart from great flexibility in some areas?

 

You understand gay marriage costs heterosexual taxpayers hundreds of millions of Dollares, Euros and Baht?

Edited July 18, 2020 by Logosone

[oceanyachting]

No I don't understand how gay marriage costs taxpayers

Please explain

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by oceanyachting

[oceanyachting]

23 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

Well exactly, and because gay people can never have and will not have kids (perversions of science or parenting excepted) they will never contribute to the pool of taxpayers. So why give them the tax breaks, employment benefits, unemployment benefits, pension rights, inheritance advantages that marriage brings?

 

What do they bring to the table? Apart from great flexibility in some areas?

 

You understand gay marriage costs heterosexual taxpayers hundreds of millions of Dollares, Euros and Baht?

explain the cost

 

[oceanyachting]

As I thought. No reply

[Logosone]

23 minutes ago, oceanyachting said:

No I don't understand how gay marriage costs taxpayers

Please explain

 

With pleasure.

 

The Congressional Budget Office in the US estimated that the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as Social Security and inheritance taxes) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019. 

 

https://images.procon.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/cbo-same-sex-benefits.pdf

 

NB, that's just some federal employees, no mention of private sector employees. And it focuses mostly on health care only, not tax breaks as such.

 

In Germany the Spiegel calculated that a single tax-break related to gay marriage, a single one, costs the German taxpayer up to 286 million Euro. Every year.

 

https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/was-das-ehegattensplitting-fuer-homo-ehen-den-staat-kostet-a-904171.html

 

Then you have employee benefits, unemployment benefits, inheritance tax advantages, and as you know or should know married people benefit from a whole host of tax advantages across the world. All of which would become available to gays upon gay marriage being legalised.

 

And all, without even the a single chance of gays ever contributing to the pool of taxpayers or pension contributors after their inevitable demise. So, for my children, what is the benefit of gay marriage? I know what the cost is. Still don't know what the benefit is.

[oceanyachting]

15 minutes ago, Logosone said:

With pleasure.

 

The Congressional Budget Office in the US estimated that the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as Social Security and inheritance taxes) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019. 

 

https://images.procon.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/cbo-same-sex-benefits.pdf

 

NB, that's just some federal employees, no mention of private sector employees. And it focuses mostly on health care only, not tax breaks as such.

 

In Germany the Spiegel calculated that a single tax-break related to gay marriage, a single one, costs the German taxpayer up to 286 million Euro. Every year.

 

https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/was-das-ehegattensplitting-fuer-homo-ehen-den-staat-kostet-a-904171.html

 

Then you have employee benefits, unemployment benefits, inheritance tax advantages, and as you know or should know married people benefit from a whole host of tax advantages across the world. All of which would become available to gays upon gay marriage being legalised.

 

And all, without even the a single chance of gays ever contributing to the pool of taxpayers or pension contributors after their inevitable demise. So, for my children, what is the benefit of gay marriage? I know what the cost is. Still don't know what the benefit is.

We're talking about Thailand. Please restructure your reply explaining the costs in Thailand

[Sujo]

13 minutes ago, Logosone said:

With pleasure.

 

The Congressional Budget Office in the US estimated that the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefits to same-sex domestic partners of certain federal employees (making no mention of additional costs such as Social Security and inheritance taxes) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019. 

 

https://images.procon.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/cbo-same-sex-benefits.pdf

 

NB, that's just some federal employees, no mention of private sector employees. And it focuses mostly on health care only, not tax breaks as such.

 

In Germany the Spiegel calculated that a single tax-break related to gay marriage, a single one, costs the German taxpayer up to 286 million Euro. Every year.

 

https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/was-das-ehegattensplitting-fuer-homo-ehen-den-staat-kostet-a-904171.html

 

Then you have employee benefits, unemployment benefits, inheritance tax advantages, and as you know or should know married people benefit from a whole host of tax advantages across the world. All of which would become available to gays upon gay marriage being legalised.

 

And all, without even the a single chance of gays ever contributing to the pool of taxpayers or pension contributors after their inevitable demise. So, for my children, what is the benefit of gay marriage? I know what the cost is. Still don't know what the benefit is.

So why should I, as a never married and no children person subsidise tax breaks for those that have.

 

Really, i read the first 2 pages then this last page. There are some sick people in this world and it isnt the gays. Its the troglodytes that support trump that seem to have the issue.

 

Luckily there are not many uneducated deplorables. They learnt their lesson.

[oceanyachting]

You didn't understand the topic! Sorry if English is not your first language. It is difficult for you to reply in an English language forum

 

[oceanyachting]

Sorry Sujo. That wasn't to you! it was to it was to logosone

 

[DrTuner]

About the children needed as future taxpayers: yes, it's a ponzi scheme. At some point, probably a couple of generations from now, the number of working age people will not be able to cover the cost of pensions, etc.

 

I've never been a fan of taxes, socialism and state pension systems & co. Made my own pension and don't need any handouts. I'd suggest everybody else to try to do the same. Then the whole point of favorism in a society becomes moot, as there is no money handed out.

[Logosone]

14 minutes ago, Sujo said:

So why should I, as a never married and no children person subsidise tax breaks for those that have.

 

Really, i read the first 2 pages then this last page. There are some sick people in this world and it isnt the gays. Its the troglodytes that support trump that seem to have the issue.

 

Luckily there are not many uneducated deplorables. They learnt their lesson.

Well, isn't it obvious? Because people who can and do have children are the ones who ensure that systems that people like you, gays and everyone, benefit from, pensions, hospitals, schools, roads, theatres, are viable because they are the ones who contribute the taxpayers and pension contributors that ensure that all these things continue to exist.

 

So clearly, people who can and do have children should be subsidised by those who refuse or can not have children.

 

It's quite obvious really when you think about it.

 

If you have an issue with this take it up with the governments of Singapore, Japan, France, the USA, every government in the world, since they all provide incentives for people who have children.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Logosone

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

About the children needed as future taxpayers: yes, it's a ponzi scheme. At some point, probably a couple of generations from now, the number of working age people will not be able to cover the cost of pensions, etc.

 

I've never been a fan of taxes, socialism and state pension systems & co. Made my own pension and don't need any handouts. I'd suggest everybody else to try to do the same. Then the whole point of favorism in a society becomes moot, as there is no money handed out.

Yes indeed. 

 

Neither have I, which is why I moved to the Cayman Islands for many years, to not pay any tax at all. 

 

I'm no fan of taxes, socialism and state pensions, believe me. But what to do with the old, the sick, the infirm? How to maintain them without taxes?

 

Obviously nothing I said applies to people who have a private pension. To the extent anyone has a state pension however, their claims exceed what they paid in by far, which is why the governments have to go to the capital markets to finance the pensions. This applies to almost every country. What is paid in for pensions is not enough to fund the claims. Talking about non-private pensions obviously.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, CMNightRider said:

Why did you send me an article about animals sex life?  I'm not interested what you do with animals or with other men.  Common sense should tell you homosexual sex is wrong.   

It wasn't about bestiality. It was about how homosexuality is natural among both humans and many other species. 

[Donutz]

Civil partnership is better than nothing but falling short of equal rights. I see it as a human right that any two adults who are capable of making an informed decision should be able to marry together. But human rights are a bit of an issue in LOS... the dinosaurs probably aren't ready yet for gay marriage.

 

And Thai society is more about tolerating (gays etc) than truly accepting and respecting them. See the surveys where about half of them says they wouldn't be too happy about an LGBT in their own family or office. But hopefully respect, acceptance and human rights may one day be adopted my the majority of the country.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, Donutz said:

And Thai society is more about tolerating (gays etc) than truly accepting and respecting them. See the surveys where about half of them says they wouldn't be too happy about an LGBT in their own family or office. But hopefully respect, acceptance and human rights may one day be adopted my the majority of the country.

 

That's the same in every country, even in Netherlands. There is no country where gays are truly accepted and respected.

 

It's not like it's a desirable achievement. Like climbing Everest.

 

Sure, laws in UK, Germany, Netherlands etc protect gays. But most of the population there would not want an LGBT in their own family, let's be honest.

[oceanyachting]

Can the religious amongst you please explain something to me. You say your god created Adam and Eve. They populated the world by having 3 sons? No girls and anyway incest is wrong?

[moontang]

12 minutes ago, oceanyachting said:

Can the religious amongst you please explain something to me. You say your god created Adam and Eve. They populated the world by having 3 sons? No girls and anyway incest is wrong?

If you can't respect someone's religion, than you have had too much perversity training, and not enough diversity training.  And of course, you live in a country, where people think a soi dog might be the uncle that drank himself to death at age 34.

Edited July 18, 2020 by moontang

[oceanyachting]

so you pick which bits to believe?

moontang

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by oceanyachting

[oceanyachting]

And someone whose religion says decapitate all infidels, just respect them?

[rumak]

why shouldn't they have the same right as everyone else to screw up their lives ?

 

Note:  a shout out to rkidlid who made pretty much the same post on page 1  

 

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by rumak

[balo]

3 hours ago, oceanyachting said:

Can the religious amongst you please explain something to me. You say your god created Adam and Eve. They populated the world by having 3 sons? No girls and anyway incest is wrong?

It's pure fantasy , nothing to explain. I'm still wondering why so many humans still believe in that book when we learned so much today thanks to science. 
 
    

[checkered flag]

11 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

That's the same in every country, even in Netherlands. There is no country where gays are truly accepted and respected.

 

It's not like it's a desirable achievement. Like climbing Everest.

 

Sure, laws in UK, Germany, Netherlands etc protect gays. But most of the population there would not want an LGBT in their own family, let's be honest.

Acceptance and respect are not thing that can be legislated. They are how we believe and feel about things. If I don't respect or accept something that's OK, if I discriminate based on it it's a violation of human rights. Thailand in general is extremely tolerant as a society. Those that act out and/or are flagrant whether gay or straight are not accepted by most. 

No need for special laws here and it's extremely unlikely to happen.

[The Barmbeker]

17 hours ago, moontang said:

no, but they are forcing it on the youngest generation as part of an indoctrination.  It isn't enough to simply tolerate it; you must endorse it or be labeled a homophobe.  And the absurdities of what has happened with the transgenders playing high school sports as women.  Wasn't a good idea.  Libertarianism is fine until it infringes on your own rights.

What planet are you living on?

What is "indoctrinated" is EQUALITY!

And yes, that should be endorsed!

Oh and the sanctity of school - sports was shattered?

The horror!

Do you think, some boy is going through the difficulties of sex change, to triumph some 15 year old girls in the 100 meters?

It infringes on exactly no ones rights!

It just gives some rights to people who had less or no rights! 

Edited July 19, 2020 by The Barmbeker

[The Barmbeker]

14 hours ago, oceanyachting said:

No I don't understand how gay marriage costs taxpayers

Please explain

 

Nonononono...please don't go there!

????

[The Barmbeker]

6 hours ago, moontang said:

If you can't respect someone's religion, than you have had too much perversity training, and not enough diversity training.  And of course, you live in a country, where people think a soi dog might be the uncle that drank himself to death at age 34.

Oh...so tolerance and accepting of YOUR SPECIFIC religion is fine, but the muslims...obvioulsly not!

Interesting!