Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

[GreatestIam]

Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.

Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.

For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.

It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.

I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY

If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.

We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.

We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.

We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.

Should we?

Morality says yes.

Will we do the right thing?

Not till hell freezes over.

Regards

DL

I will ask you do you believe wealth is finite that there is only a limited amount so when one has more it causes another to have less?

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

 

[daveman]

I will ask you do you believe wealth is finite that there is only a limited amount so when one has more it causes another to have less?

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

Morals are subjective, too. For instance, you think armed robbery is a fine idea -- yet here you are, claiming to be a moral person.

 

[GreatestIam]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

its like the two kids on the beach playing in the sand
instead of complaining the other kid has more sand in his bucket then you and demanding some of his start digging your own dam sand

is creating wealth always easy? no its not
does luck play a role? sure in the hell does

but not putting forth the effort not rolling the dice gets you no where

Equal opportunity, something fictional, is not equal outcome.

I am talking of the moral limits to what being a moral human is all about.

Your morals as well.

Visually move a bit of wealth in the graph from right to left to see what kind of loose change would be needed to end poverty.

Tell us what you would do with the taxing power?

Regards
DL

 

[TRFjr]

I will ask you do you believe wealth is finite that there is only a limited amount so when one has more it causes another to have less?

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

making a person dependent isnt moral its a form of slavery
helping a person become independent is freedom

 

[GreatestIam]

I will ask you do you believe wealth is finite that there is only a limited amount so when one has more it causes another to have less?

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

you could give the poor a million dollars and in two months they would have zero! It is a no win game with losers. The experiment has already been done, it’s called the lottery.

When all you know is what a dick and Pussy is you’re toast

You disappoint and do not seem to recognize that what you just said you hate to see happen, is exactly what you want to see happen in a trickled up economy.

Keeping cash at the top does not start the cycle of spending required to stimulate economies.

What you hate paid salaries and goods and you are cursing it, when you should be urging the rich to do it a lot more.

You see doom where the reality is a boon.

Regards
DL

 

[TRFjr]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

its like the two kids on the beach playing in the sand
instead of complaining the other kid has more sand in his bucket then you and demanding some of his start digging your own dam sand

is creating wealth always easy? no its not
does luck play a role? sure in the hell does

but not putting forth the effort not rolling the dice gets you no where

Equal opportunity, something fictional, is not equal outcome.

I am talking of the moral limits to what being a moral human is all about.

Your morals as well.

Visually move a bit of wealth in the graph from right to left to see what kind of loose change would be needed to end poverty.

Tell us what you would do with the taxing power?

Regards
DL

it won't end poverty just makes them dependent
you give a person a fish you feed them for a day you teach them to fish and you feed them for life

 

[GreatestIam]

correct that money you redistribute to the poor will just make it back into the pockets of the wealthy

Indeed.

With value added in case you goofs have not dithered that out.

Trickle up pays faster than trickle down.

Regards
DL

 

[TRFjr]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

its like the two kids on the beach playing in the sand
instead of complaining the other kid has more sand in his bucket then you and demanding some of his start digging your own dam sand

is creating wealth always easy? no its not
does luck play a role? sure in the hell does

but not putting forth the effort not rolling the dice gets you no where

Equal opportunity, something fictional, is not equal outcome.

I am talking of the moral limits to what being a moral human is all about.

Your morals as well.

Visually move a bit of wealth in the graph from right to left to see what kind of loose change would be needed to end poverty.

Tell us what you would do with the taxing power?

Regards
DL

stop your bull shit your demanding equal outcome because you are judging equality of opportunity by outcome

 

[TRFjr]

correct that money you redistribute to the poor will just make it back into the pockets of the wealthy

Indeed.

With value added in case you goofs have not dithered that out.

Trickle up pays faster than trickle down.

Regards
DL

and then when the wealthy gains back what was taken and the poor goes back to being poor whats next another redistribution scheme ?

what your doing is dipping water out of the deep end of the pool pouring it into the shallow end and then claiming you made the water level rise in the pool

if you want to help people out of poverty wealth needs to be created not redistributed

 

[GreatestIam]

The post starts off with an ass backward statement and builds on the lie. Taxation doesn't determine what poverty levels exist. Taxation is based on economic success.

Taxation is based on many factors, including the willingness of people to pay it, but the source of taxing power is not relevant to the fact that it is there to be used to accomplish the desires of the people. That desire no longer really exists but hey, no one seem to care.

Power of taxation is the issue.

Regards
DL

Name one society that achieved equity through taxation. Hell, name one society that achieved equity.

Who even talked equality?

At most, we are talking a 1 % tax over maybe 5 years. Peanuts.

I did put something above on that but never advocated such a stupid notion.

Equality would mean my getting a lobotomy and become a sheeple. No thanks.

Regards
DL

 

[jc456]

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

you could give the poor a million dollars and in two months they would have zero! It is a no win game with losers. The experiment has already been done, it’s called the lottery.

When all you know is what a dick and Pussy is you’re toast

You disappoint and do not seem to recognize that what you just said you hate to see happen, is exactly what you want to see happen in a trickled up economy.

Keeping cash at the top does not start the cycle of spending required to stimulate economies.

What you hate paid salaries and goods and you are cursing it, when you should be urging the rich to do it a lot more.

You see doom where the reality is a boon.

Regards
DL

Huh, you must mean some other asshole

 

[daveman]

The post starts off with an ass backward statement and builds on the lie. Taxation doesn't determine what poverty levels exist. Taxation is based on economic success.

Taxation is based on many factors, including the willingness of people to pay it, but the source of taxing power is not relevant to the fact that it is there to be used to accomplish the desires of the people. That desire no longer really exists but hey, no one seem to care.

Power of taxation is the issue.

Regards
DL

Name one society that achieved equity through taxation. Hell, name one society that achieved equity.

Who even talked equality?

At most, we are talking a 1 % tax over maybe 5 years. Peanuts.

I did put something above on that but never advocated such a stupid notion.

Equality would mean my getting a lobotomy and become a sheeple. No thanks.

Regards
DL

If it's just peanuts, that won't help the poor, will it?

Face it, Skippy -- you don't want to help poor people, you just want to punish rich people.

 

[GreatestIam]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

Cause money can’t fix poor

I am open to suggestions, but give a ways and means chapter with it or it is just pie in the sky buddy.

Regards
DL

Post #150 that you keep ignoring.

Nothing of interest should be ignored.

Did I miss one of your inane points?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

Morals are subjective, too. For instance, you think armed robbery is a fine idea -- yet here you are, claiming to be a moral person.

And here you are being a lair as you have no quote.

Thanks for showing all that you are a piece of human garbage.

Regards
DL

 

[jc456]

The post starts off with an ass backward statement and builds on the lie. Taxation doesn't determine what poverty levels exist. Taxation is based on economic success.

Taxation is based on many factors, including the willingness of people to pay it, but the source of taxing power is not relevant to the fact that it is there to be used to accomplish the desires of the people. That desire no longer really exists but hey, no one seem to care.

Power of taxation is the issue.

Regards
DL

Name one society that achieved equity through taxation. Hell, name one society that achieved equity.

Who even talked equality?

At most, we are talking a 1 % tax over maybe 5 years. Peanuts.

I did put something above on that but never advocated such a stupid notion.

Equality would mean my getting a lobotomy and become a sheeple. No thanks.

Regards
DL

If it's just peanuts, that won't help the poor, will it?

Face it, Skippy -- you don't want to help poor people, you just want to punish rich people.

In actuality, he wants the impression he cares while he takes your heart. That’s a leftist

 

[GreatestIam]

Yes.

That is why it is important to have all share the wealth equitably, which as that graph of finite wealth shows, is not happening at present and only needs a small adjustment to bring to a more perfect state. Just what the founding fathers wanted.

I wish you Americans would get the led out of your asses and get on with it. The whole world is waiting for you to lead. Get leading.

Regards
DL

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

making a person dependent isnt moral its a form of slavery
helping a person become independent is freedom

I agree that our oligarch owners have enslaved us by making us dependent on them and that that is immoral.

I disagree with your last as freedom is more of a fiction than a possibility.

Regards
DL

 

[progressive hunter]

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

making a person dependent isnt moral its a form of slavery
helping a person become independent is freedom

I agree that our oligarch owners have enslaved us by making us dependent on them and that that is immoral.

I disagree with your last as freedom is more of a fiction than a possibility.

Regards
DL

your leaders for sure,,,ours not so much,,,we still have millions of people wanting to come here for our freedom,,,

 

[daveman]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

Cause money can’t fix poor

I am open to suggestions, but give a ways and means chapter with it or it is just pie in the sky buddy.

Regards
DL

Post #150 that you keep ignoring.

Nothing of interest should be ignored.

Did I miss one of your inane points?

Regards
DL

You only believe it's inane because it proves your wealth theft scheme is impossible.

 

[GreatestIam]

because wealth is created and can be created by all you can have it so everyone has more and more and more with out causing anyone to have less

If all have more and more over time, why do children still starve by the tens of millions per year?

By your theory, they should not exist in poverty as there should not be any.

Regards
DL

its like the two kids on the beach playing in the sand
instead of complaining the other kid has more sand in his bucket then you and demanding some of his start digging your own dam sand

is creating wealth always easy? no its not
does luck play a role? sure in the hell does

but not putting forth the effort not rolling the dice gets you no where

Equal opportunity, something fictional, is not equal outcome.

I am talking of the moral limits to what being a moral human is all about.

Your morals as well.

Visually move a bit of wealth in the graph from right to left to see what kind of loose change would be needed to end poverty.

Tell us what you would do with the taxing power?

Regards
DL

it won't end poverty just makes them dependent
you give a person a fish you feed them for a day you teach them to fish and you feed them for life

If you do not recognize that hungry people do not learn as well, if not well fed, and try to teach a hungry person a skill, you shoot yourself in the foot by not feeding him first. as it will take your valuable time twice as long.

Goof.

Little wisdom sayings like your and mine are usually more fools saying than wise.

Regards
DL

 

[daveman]

and that ignorance right there is why you are so easily propagandized in believing in wealth redistribution
wake up stupid wealth is created its not finite its practically infinite one having more doesn't cause another to have less ​

I dealt with this by asking you to use the graph to express that and you failed and lost your point.

Go back to school. Dropouts are so lacking. That is why you guys use epithets so easily.

Regards
DL

if you give each of the 20% groups 10% more wealth that graph wouldnt move would it?
so I will ask whats the goal of wealth redistribution? is it to bring those below the poverty line above it is it to help out the middle class? is it to penalize and punish the wealthy
whats the intended goal?

Kennedy said that Americans were up to a challenge that was hard and not easy to do what he thought America had to do to stay at the top of the line.

Here, in moral terms, you are asking me why Americans won't do the easy thing to move to the top of the moral line, and all I can say is, I don't know.

It is stupid and I do not want to call my American friends stupid.

Immoral as fuck, yes, stupid, is too subjective.

Regards
DL

Morals are subjective, too. For instance, you think armed robbery is a fine idea -- yet here you are, claiming to be a moral person.

And here you are being a lair as you have no quote.

Thanks for showing all that you are a piece of human garbage.

Regards
DL

"Lair"? Dumbass.

Meanwhile, you want to take money from people who earned it and given it to people who didn't, with the threat of government violence.

But then, totalitarians always believe government violence is justified as long as it gives them what they want.

You're just a shitty little thief.