Hayes: We Are No Longer Able To Tax The Very Rich In Our Country

Okay, I think I've got to go over some basic principles for my own sake.

Let's suppose that in the world, there is only $100 and there are 100 people in it(for simplicity sake) . That's all the money there is and all the people. Everyone has $1 to begin with. John Doe invents a widget and as a result everyone wants one. It costs a penny, so everyone buys the widget and gives John Doe a penny. Of the $100 in the world, John Doe is going to have more than the other 99 people in the world. John may eventually not make the widget himself, so he hires Adam and Sam to make them and he pays them part of what he receives to make the widget. No matter how hard you try, John will probably have more than Adam and Sam and 95% of the people.

Now, according to the left, John Doe is a bad guy. Of the 100 people in the world, they each WILL NOT have $1. Some will have more and others, will probably have ZERO. Even if you stopped, pooled the money and GAVE everyone $1, within a month you'd have some who had more than others. John saves $20 of the $100 total and dies, if he wills that money to his son Ted, then Ted is now the bad guy. "Oh my God, he didn't EARN that money! He's a TRUST FUND BABY!" becomes the rallying cry of the left. We MUST tax him and forcibly take money from him and give it to Adrian who is sitting here doing nothing because it is compassionate and just.

You know, I don't even know how I came across it, but Michael Moore was being interviewed by Pierce Morgan (I know, I know) and I listened for about ten minutes (It was all I could take). Moore goes into this rant about how we're all part of this one big happy family and we have to take care of each other and that this thing of "everyman for himself (capatalism)" was just wrong. As most liberal left-wing parrots, Moore lives in a world so removed from reality because HIS MONEY allows him to do it. I realize to the left that you think it's compassionate and caring for your fellow man and everything, but I've got news for you. Capatalism and free enterprise is the most compassionate economic system that there is. ANYONE can make a living IF YOU APPLY yourself.

I am NOT jealous of CEO's, or of billionaires, or of people who have more than I do. There are plenty. All I ask for is a fair start at the beginning of this race. Then get out of my way and let me run the race...
 
...not a large part of the population. But they control a LARGE part of the wealth. That a big freakin problem...
It's life. We deal with it. It's good.

We don't mind it when one good song writer can make up so many more really neat songs than anyone else, so it's good when we end up with one singer with millions of listeners. We get one fantastic comedian making millions laugh. This is good because we all get to enjoy the best and when the best create more wealth than the rest of us everyone benefits.

These days we got a stupid push to punish the best by taking away the wealth they've created. We're all worse off.
 

Not dismissed. I read most of them and could not find a number. There was something about the .01%, and Fortune 500 execs. but no link to the actual study.

That 400:1 ratio has been cited over and over again. I'm just curious how large the sample was.

I'm not saying these people aren't overpaid. But that's not my call. I'd just like to know if we are talking about a couple hundred people or several thousand.

I imagine there are thousands and thousands of 'CEO"s. It's more than a bit disingenuous to include them all, doncha think?
 
CEOs are paid by businesses. The transaction involves two parties, the business (payer), and CEO (payee). The business & CEO are the only people involved. Between them both, they set their "fair market price".

Other people, remote from the transaction, "on the other side of the economy", are not involved, and are not (economically) relevant -- they are not related to the (economic) transaction. Please ponder -- do people complain, when somebody buys expensive wine, for thousands of dollars per bottle? Or, expensive shoes, for thousands of dollars per pair? Or, expensive cars, for hundreds of thousands of dollars? Why would neurotoxic wine be worth thousands of dollars per bottle?? Who knows?? But the "fair market price" is decided on, between the seller & buyer -- "it's their money, their decision". The wine seller "earns" their money (per this example).

If workers want more say, in wages & salaries paid by businesses, then they can buy those businesses shares; and vote in shareholder meetings. Ideally (per economic competitiveness), neither white collar nor blue collar workers would "vote themselves their business' private treasury", and tank a productive business, for immediate personal gratification.
 

Forum List

Back
Top