u/solaeon

Thanks for reading my post.

Technically I think I am the only person that actually tried to answer the question posed by the OP.

The question was about 'using' which isn't limited to texting. If limited to texting then I would say it appears to be dangerous.

I should have said statistically significant or something of that effect because as you correctly asserted that statement is not correct.

The simple truth is it can be low risk activity. Contrary to the blast of advertisements where everyone is on a killing spree, of the millions of infractions that happen everyday statically all of them won't be involved in an accident.

The OP is involved in tax evasion and has some hope of a tax return if they fess up. What can you say to that? There is no accountant-client privilege; an accountant can just as much report them for tax evasion.

I will give you the inappropriate advice:

The ATO aren't going to give a damn about you, just do your taxes this year and ignore the rest. Let them chase you - which again is very unlikely - for any years past. Don't put a target on yourself.

If you were being dodgy in the past don't tell anyone. I am not sure how telling someone will make it better for you. No one is going to care about your honesty now, it is not a court, they will simply follow process.

Another point, you don't need group certificates to do you tax. You simply have to inform the ATO of how much your earn.

A bit late to the party but I don't think there is low levels of political engagement. It maybe true people don't talk about it much between themselves, though there is a never ending media cycle of politics being broadcast 24/7 which I believe contradicts the assertion of low engagement.

Some issues you raise I believe can be explained by being realistic in regards on how we view ourselves. Humans are not the perfect logical machines, we are easily influenced by propaganda. I don't like to use the word propaganda because it is associated with just he government but it is just so apt to describe the amount of persuasive information people have to process. E.g. Advertising.

Take 'boat people', pragmatically it is a completely non issue for the population yet this is a hot political topic which easily divides people on a conceptual issue. I say conceptual because the arguments I have seen are based on hypothetical future outcomes, not on current day realities.

So I think better training/education on how to defend against propaganda will improve the situation more so than learning about the political process as some have suggested.

I have other thoughts about the actual voting process, for example a no confidence option; some random selection rather than simply first past 50%; resume of politicians being public, etc. Though I don't think any of these will work when people are so easily manipulated in what to think and any idea that reduces political power for parties will never see the light of day.

Well prepare to be miserable most of your life.

There is a copy of this book http://www.amazon.com/Being-Logical-Guide-Good-Thinking/dp/0812971159/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8 floating around on the internet. I recommend you read it or something equivalent. I think it will greatly help you because your emotional thoughts are leading you astray and perhaps someone has taken advantage of you.

You might feel it as a slight but if you really believe in this stuff it will actually help you be more convincing as your communication is full of logical fallacies which few can take seriously.

I am actually a libertarian but your right wing libertarian rhetoric is useless against me. You have formed mental models of reality that is not productive to your happiness. Few actually like paying for things they perceive of limited value. E.g I don't like paying supply charges for utilities, 30% cuts to app stores, 60% cuts to franchise owners, product branding, etc. Yes I don't like paying tax but I do, I forget about it and move on with my life, it not a chain to my soul that I drag everywhere. When you equate these things to stealing you are causing yourself to be depressed. Some people with more power, influence, resources are always going to be around to limit your pursuits, government or no government.

Your arguments are extremely weak, so if you want to be an evangelist to your cause you will have to be smarter than this. The argument that a single failure implies systemic failure is bullshit; "Economic Racism..." is bullshit.

Your anti government delusions is a malignant cancer to your mind, turning rational thoughts in to puss of hate. Forget about the government, remove the burden from your life because if anything it is these thoughts that are holding you back. Heaps of people are getting ahead in the same system you say is holding you back; don't you see that?

What macro economic philosophy is actually grounded with scientific evidence? In my own causal studies it appears apparent there is none.

Honestly given how you communicate I doubt you are rolling in the monies yourself, so I welfare state might be in your self interest.

No, you are upset because your assertions was just plain wrong.

Indeed if you subscribe to Ayn Rand objectivism, you will not find peace on this subreddit.

Drop the fallacies and you might be happier. The world will never be a Libertarianism reality because the concept is a fantasy, it will never work.

No need for luck, millions of people are not paying tax everyday. Earn under $18k you don't have to pay tax. Simple.

Hey here is an open secret, no one is forced to pay taxes. If you are personally paying tax then it is by your own choice, it is not even illegal not to pay tax.

Of course most rational persons would choose to pay tax because they can earn more.

It is true, ordinary people are being distracted by creating resentment between those whose major source of income is earnings wages/salary. The real cheats are corporations.

Companies paid less than $75 billion in tax, most of the tax is shouldered by ordinary people. Politicians tell us there is nothing that can be done; it all too hard to get them to pay more taxes. Yet companies only exist by laws created by politicians! The idea that nothing can be done is a lie.

A link to the Australian government revenue: http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/overview/html/overview_31.htm

Only the top 10 Australian listed companies by revenue, 2104:

1. BHP Billiton: $72.97 billion

2. Woolworths: $61.21 billion

3. Wesfarmers: $60.52 billion

4. Rio Tinto: $59.14 billion

5. NAB: $45.34 billion

6. Commonwealth Bank: $44.31 billion

7. Westpac: $38.64bn

8. ANZ: $35.25bn

9. Telstra: $26.45bn

10. Caltex Australia: $24.73 billion

You seem blinded by discontent for a few rich people when the biggest leaners are corporations. Tax structures are shafting individuals while corporation are accumulating all the wealth.

Australia as a whole might be low taxing but if a particular subset of the population bearing most of the tax burden then the subset will claim it is high taxing.

It is easy to divide income tax by gross income and claim low tax but if you deduct all the necessary expenses to simply exist in the economy then individuals could rightly feel an injustice when someone on a measly $55000 income is paying a higher percentage of tax then a $5000000000 income.

All that you have said only convinces me more that these types of polls are retarded. The only possible thing I can think of they express is allegiance. Politicians want to know if people like the politics they are selling, they don't care if people actually know what they are selling.

If you are accurate and this type of poll is robust then I am thinking, 'what an embarrassment'. This level of questions is what I expect from a primary school student. The questions are almost entirely useless in being able to extract any exact meaning given the ambiguity of terms such as 'tough'. No consideration of external influences taken into account, etc.

Ignoring the colloquialism of the phrase. Technically water can come in contact with water therefor water can be wet is it not?

All fines are unjust. The harshness of the sting when one gets pinged is dependent on wealth not the act.

The sterile environment is only a hypothesis. It is my understanding that no causes have been proven.

Yes I am thinking about hosting a VPN myself. To me it is a trade off between speed and anonymity. I am skeptical to the sustained bandwidth of a VPN provider and I give a priority of speed over anonymity.

Actually I was intending for the PI to to be the VPN provider located overseas.

I like doing things myself and the with a PI I know the CPU/Bandwidth will be constant unlike other VPN providers where their infrastructure is hidden or a cheap VPS.

Thanks.

I haven't quite given up on the PI. It seems OpenVPN is based on TLS/SSL and given you mentioned it is slow for torrenting leads be to believe there might be some misconfiguration for a setup that should only require a single TCP port.

There is IPsec which I think is often a kernel level service that could provide sufficient bandwidth.

Did you consider IPsec?