Is it moral to have this much of the world's resources?

[midcan5]

More proof America is becoming a third world nation due to republican voodoo economics. A hard question: Is it moral (not legal) to make that much money?


"Piketty and Saez’s top bracket comprises 0.01 percent of U.S. taxpayers. There are 14,400 of them, earning an average of $12,775,000, with total earnings of $184 billion. The minimum annual income in this group is more than $5 million, so it seems reasonable to suppose that they could, without much hardship, give away a third of their annual income, an average of $4.3 million each, for a total of around $61 billion. That would still leave each of them with an annual income of at least $3.3 million.

Next comes the rest of the top 0.1 percent (excluding the category just described, as I shall do henceforth). There are 129,600 in this group, with an average income of just over $2 million and a minimum income of $1.1 million. If they were each to give a quarter of their income, that would yield about $65 billion, and leave each of them with at least $846,000 annually."

What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You? Peter Singer

"What is a human life worth? You may not want to put a price tag on a it. But if we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of a human life would be in the millions. Consistent with the foundations of our democracy and our frequently professed belief in the inherent dignity of human beings, we would also agree that all humans are created equal, at least to the extent of denying that differences of sex, ethnicity, nationality and place of residence change the value of a human life."

What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Peddle your socialist crap else where.

 

[LOki]

More proof America is becoming a third world nation due to republican voodoo economics. A hard question: Is it moral (not legal) to make that much money?


"Piketty and Saez’s top bracket comprises 0.01 percent of U.S. taxpayers. There are 14,400 of them, earning an average of $12,775,000, with total earnings of $184 billion. The minimum annual income in this group is more than $5 million, so it seems reasonable to suppose that they could, without much hardship, give away a third of their annual income, an average of $4.3 million each, for a total of around $61 billion. That would still leave each of them with an annual income of at least $3.3 million.

Next comes the rest of the top 0.1 percent (excluding the category just described, as I shall do henceforth). There are 129,600 in this group, with an average income of just over $2 million and a minimum income of $1.1 million. If they were each to give a quarter of their income, that would yield about $65 billion, and leave each of them with at least $846,000 annually."

What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You? Peter Singer

"What is a human life worth? You may not want to put a price tag on a it. But if we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of a human life would be in the millions. Consistent with the foundations of our democracy and our frequently professed belief in the inherent dignity of human beings, we would also agree that all humans are created equal, at least to the extent of denying that differences of sex, ethnicity, nationality and place of residence change the value of a human life."

What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

Is your morality really all that virtuous if it must be forced upon others at gunpoint?

The target we should be setting for ourselves is not halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty, and without enough to eat, but ensuring that no one, or virtually no one, needs to live in such degrading conditions.

This is a ridiculous goal, and inherently unjust; the better goal is, "The target we should be setting for ourselves is not halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty, and without enough to eat, but ensuring that no one, or virtually no one, is forced through the threat or application of coercive violence to live in such degrading conditions."

If people end up living in extreme poverty, and without enough to eat, due to their inherent lack of individual merit, or value to others, so much so that other will not voluntarly relieve them, then I'm fine with them dying from extreme poverty, and and lack of enough to eat--because the patently obvious reality is, we are not *actually* created equal.

 

[DiamondDave]

midcan

"I'm lazy... I want something for nothing... people who earn and accomplished should be punished... you owe me... you owe everyone else too...."

face it, socialist swine.... you want something... EARN IT... WORK FOR IT

And start realizing that communism/socialism is not a viable social system or form of government... when incentive to do extra is taken away, a society becomes a society that is full of people who wish to do just enough to get by... human nature shows that people wish to benefit from their extra effort... that people put their family first... that people want better... socialism is against the natural human instinct of existence... it will ALWAYS fail in anything larger than some smelly hippie commune

Socialism is the essence of a power-trip control system... there is always a ruling 'elite' (usually like the college liberals, ones who think themselves so superior, though they actually have done nothing in the real world)... the RobinHood control that is needed for socialism cannot work with people with any drive or ambition, who appreciate freedom... socialism can only work with a ruling elite towering over a group of prisoners, robots, and slaves who that force control over and manipulate every part of their lives....

grow up and realize socialism and socialist "ideals" are about as useless as tits on a bull

 

[busara]

midcan

"I'm lazy... I want something for nothing... people who earn and accomplished should be punished... you owe me... you owe everyone else too...."

face it, socialist swine.... you want something... EARN IT... WORK FOR IT

And start realizing that communism/socialism is not a viable social system or form of government... when incentive to do extra is taken away, a society becomes a society that is full of people who wish to do just enough to get by... human nature shows that people wish to benefit from their extra effort... that people put their family first... that people want better... socialism is against the natural human instinct of existence... it will ALWAYS fail in anything larger than some smelly hippie commune

Socialism is the essence of a power-trip control system... there is always a ruling 'elite' (usually like the college liberals, ones who think themselves so superior, though they actually have done nothing in the real world)... the RobinHood control that is needed for socialism cannot work with people with any drive or ambition, who appreciate freedom... socialism can only work with a ruling elite towering over a group of prisoners, robots, and slaves who that force control over and manipulate every part of their lives....

grow up and realize socialism and socialist "ideals" are about as useless as tits on a bull

the problem has to do more with this

Haves and Have-Nots: Income Inequality in America : NPR

the rich getting much richer, everyone else staying the same or even earning less. have those people really worked that much harder to to get more? has everyone else worked less? call me crazy, but i think that if america is getting 'richer' some of it should go to the other 99%, not just the top 1%. is simply taking all the $$ and redistributing it the way to go? no. but the system sure seems to be broken or at least highly skewed

 

[DiamondDave]

the problem has to do more with this

Haves and Have-Nots: Income Inequality in America : NPR

the rich getting much richer, everyone else staying the same or even earning less. have those people really worked that much harder to to get more? has everyone else worked less? call me crazy, but i think that if america is getting 'richer' some of it should go to the other 99%, not just the top 1%. is simply taking all the $$ and redistributing it the way to go? no. but the system sure seems to be broken or at least highly skewed

Call me crazy, but I take freedom VERY SERIOUSLY....


With freedom... you do not just have the freedom to succeed, but also the freedom to fail... your choices, your decisions, your efforts, your ideas, your implementation; those are the things that determine your success or failure... and those are the things that SHOULD determine it... not someone else's efforts


EVERY citizen in this country has the same freedom to make their own way.... there is absolutely NOTHING stopping you or anyone else from becoming successful...

The system is broken, namely because of the thinking of liberals and socialists who think that someone else owes them something for simply existing.... that they need to have the ability to suckle off of the tit of success....

You are owed one thing by this country... and that is the preservation of the country as a whole, to ensure that those freedoms we have are protected.... you are not owed a share of someone else's efforts

 

[busara]

Call me crazy, but I take freedom VERY SERIOUSLY....


With freedom... you do not just have the freedom to succeed, but also the freedom to fail... your choices, your decisions, your efforts, your ideas, your implementation; those are the things that determine your success or failure... and those are the things that SHOULD determine it... not someone else's efforts


EVERY citizen in this country has the same freedom to make their own way.... there is absolutely NOTHING stopping you or anyone else from becoming successful...

The system is broken, namely because of the thinking of liberals and socialists who think that someone else owes them something for simply existing.... that they need to have the ability to suckle off of the tit of success....

You are owed one thing by this country... and that is the preservation of the country as a whole, to ensure that those freedoms we have are protected.... you are not owed a share of someone else's efforts

but thats the problem. people are being rewarded unfairly for their efforts. is a CEO getting a huge bonus even when their company loses money fair? did they really earn it?
are you saying someone who is working 2 fulltime jobs and living out of an expensive hotel room because there is no affordable housing isnt trying to get ahead? can that person get loans for college to further their education to get a higher paying job? or that they will have no problem getting a loan to start a business? oh thats right, it's their own fault for being there and not earning enough. they had a choice.

like it or not, certain people ARE limited in what they can accomplish. im not talking about making this a socialistic society. im simply stating that there are disparities in our current system, and they arent all the result of personal choices

 

[editec]

Doesn't really matter where you come down on the capitalism v socialism issue.

If you want a viable nation somebody has to pay taxes or the nation inevitable goes belly up when their credit runs out.

Now the argument can be made, that the people who most benefit from the existence of a civilized society should pay the most taxes to keep it civil.

And when that does not happen?

Well then.. you end up with a nation awash in debt, printing money that becomes increasingly worthless, with an infrastructure that's falling down, populated by ill educated morons doing crime becuase they can't find a decent job that pays a living salary, and decent hard working citizens fearing for their lives.

Sound familiar, folks?

 

[DiamondDave]

but thats the problem. people are being rewarded unfairly for their efforts. is a CEO getting a huge bonus even when their company loses money fair? did they really earn it?
are you saying someone who is working 2 fulltime jobs and living out of an expensive hotel room because there is no affordable housing isnt trying to get ahead? can that person get loans for college to further their education to get a higher paying job? or that they will have no problem getting a loan to start a business? oh thats right, it's their own fault for being there and not earning enough. they had a choice.

like it or not, certain people ARE limited in what they can accomplish. im not talking about making this a socialistic society. im simply stating that there are disparities in our current system, and they arent all the result of personal choices

And let me guess... it is up to you and every other leftist to decide what is fair??.... sounds like the whiney professors/self-appointed know-it-alls complaining that they do not earn as much as people working in the real world

No.... it is up to the market.. your skills.... your projection of yourself.... your accomplishments... your decisions... etc.... to see how much compensation you can get for your services....

All people are created equal in terms of their rights and basic genetic structure... not everyone is going to have the genes of Michael Jordan or the intellect of Stephen Freaking Hawking.... but it is not up to government to say "awwwwwww.... poor baby" and make it up to you....

If you want success... you and every other citizen has the right to strive for it and achieve it... just as you have the right to sit on your lazy ass and wallow in your own filth for achieving nothing

I clawed my way up from NOTHING.... collecting cans with my grandmother for meat money to be able to have meat once or twice a week.... gardening about 90% of our yard... canning, freezing whatever we could.... working 39 hours a week at age 16 because the law said I could not work 40... using that $ to supplement my grandmother's earnings... working 2 jobs (food service by day and playing in a band at night) until I was 22.... realized that this would go nowhere and made the CHOICE to better myself... put the effort in and served my country in the military for 5 years... took advantage of my training, learned everything I could on and off the job.... got married, had a kid, and left the service... worked 2 jobs at a time... all the overtime I could get... learned even more... did what I have to do... and now I make more than about 95% of the others in this great country... because I MADE IT HAPPEN... not because I thought it was OWED to me... or that life was unfair... I made it by my own freaking efforts, because I was given the freedom to do so... and if my decisions would have been wrong instead of right, I would have had to live with the consequences of those decisions.... why??? because that is the price of freedom.... freedom is not just the freedom to get what you want because you want it... freedom is the opportunity to make of yourself what you want, by your own hand

 

[DiamondDave]

Doesn't really matter where you come down on the capitalism v socialism issue.

If you want a viable nation somebody has to pay taxes or the nation inevitable goes belly up when their credit runs out.

Now the argument can be made, that the people who most benefit from the existence of a civilized society should pay the most taxes to keep it civil.

And when that does not happen?

Well then.. you end up with a nation awash in debt, printing money that becomes increasingly worthless, with an infrastructure that's falling down, populated by ill educated morons doing crime becuase they can't find a decent job that pays a living salary, and decent hard working citizens fearing for their lives.

Sound familiar, folks?

A viable nation pays taxes to run it's governmental system... yes


But... a viable nation based on ACTUAL EQUALITY does not need a punishment tax system... it just makes the have-nots feel better to feel they are "sticking it to the man"... and they will elect those with the values based on inequality to keep that feeling

Those who earn more, even in a truly equal burden taxation system, will end up paying more in TOTAL.. that does not mean that they owe any more of a burden, percentage wise, than any other citizen in a freedom based system of equality in government

Waste in government is a terrible thing... our system, thanks to corruption and expanding the government into a handout charity system, has put us in a worse place... but becoming more controlling and more socialist is not an answer for it...or for society

 

[Dr Grump]

Is your morality really all that virtuous if it must be forced upon others at gunpoint?This is a ridiculous goal, and inherently unjust; the better goal is, "The target we should be setting for ourselves is not halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty, and without enough to eat, but ensuring that no one, or virtually no one, is forced through the threat or application of coercive violence to live in such degrading conditions."

If people end up living in extreme poverty, and without enough to eat, due to their inherent lack of individual merit, or value to others, so much so that other will not voluntarly relieve them, then I'm fine with them dying from extreme poverty, and and lack of enough to eat--because the patently obvious reality is, we are not *actually* created equal.

It's all about ME, ME, ME!! Selfish git...

 

[sealybobo]

peddle Your Socialist Crap Else Where.

T Boone Pickens Said Something About Us Sending Our Oil Overseas Is The Largest Transfer Of Wealth In The History Of The World.

The Rich Assholes In America Are Selling America Cheap. There Won't Be Anything Left When They Are Done. And You Will Work For A Foreign Company. Profits Will Go To Asia Or India.

Your Broke Ass Will Need Social Security And Yet You Promote Doing Away With It.

Your Pension Is Gone My Brother. Only A Matter Of Time.

Sell Our Ports To Dubai?

Or, You Can Work At Walmart. Just Don't Expect To Retire.

Hopefully Walmart Will Start Selling Cheap Caskets Because Your Family Won't Be Able To Afford To Bury You. I Know, You Plan On Being Creamated. Spelling Not So Good Today. Lol.

 

[busara]

And let me guess... it is up to you and every other leftist to decide what is fair??.... sounds like the whiney professors/self-appointed know-it-alls complaining that they do not earn as much as people working in the real world

No.... it is up to the market.. your skills.... your projection of yourself.... your accomplishments... your decisions... etc.... to see how much compensation you can get for your services....

All people are created equal in terms of their rights and basic genetic structure... not everyone is going to have the genes of Michael Jordan or the intellect of Stephen Freaking Hawking.... but it is not up to government to say "awwwwwww.... poor baby" and make it up to you....

If you want success... you and every other citizen has the right to strive for it and achieve it... just as you have the right to sit on your lazy ass and wallow in your own filth for achieving nothing

I clawed my way up from NOTHING.... collecting cans with my grandmother for meat money to be able to have meat once or twice a week.... gardening about 90% of our yard... canning, freezing whatever we could.... working 39 hours a week at age 16 because the law said I could not work 40... using that $ to supplement my grandmother's earnings... working 2 jobs (food service by day and playing in a band at night) until I was 22.... realized that this would go nowhere and made the CHOICE to better myself... put the effort in and served my country in the military for 5 years... took advantage of my training, learned everything I could on and off the job.... got married, had a kid, and left the service... worked 2 jobs at a time... all the overtime I could get... learned even more... did what I have to do... and now I make more than about 95% of the others in this great country... because I MADE IT HAPPEN... not because I thought it was OWED to me... or that life was unfair... I made it by my own freaking efforts, because I was given the freedom to do so... and if my decisions would have been wrong instead of right, I would have had to live with the consequences of those decisions.... why??? because that is the price of freedom.... freedom is not just the freedom to get what you want because you want it... freedom is the opportunity to make of yourself what you want, by your own hand

didnt i just say that im simply pointing out where it isnt fair and that im not advocating socialism?
im very glad you have succeeded in this country. i truly am. and i want more people to succeed. if only your attitude of wanting more was more prevalent.
but if you see nothing wrong with the real income for the vast majority of people in this country actually going down over the last 30 years while the elites gather up all the wealth and assets and resources, well, thats fine. i just feel we can make it a little easier for the disadvantaged to succeed. more affordable housing. higher paying jobs. cheaper education. no handouts, just easier upward mobility.

 

[DiamondDave]

you want to give legs up... I'm all for that... I fully support charities that do such noble work... but that is yours and my VOLUNTARY choice of what we support in those efforts... that is not the job of a government based on liberty, freedom, and equality (and all the positives AND NEGATIVES that come from those concepts/rights)

 

[editec]

A viable nation pays taxes to run it's governmental system... yes


But... a viable nation based on ACTUAL EQUALITY does not need a punishment tax system... it just makes the have-nots feel better to feel they are "sticking it to the man"... and they will elect those with the values based on inequality to keep that feeling

Those who earn more, even in a truly equal burden taxation system, will end up paying more in TOTAL.. that does not mean that they owe any more of a burden, percentage wise, than any other citizen in a freedom based system of equality in government

Waste in government is a terrible thing... our system, thanks to corruption and expanding the government into a handout charity system, has put us in a worse place... but becoming more controlling and more socialist is not an answer for it...or for society

Socialism?

What does type of government have to do with this issue?

Socialism, Communism, Democratic Republic in a mixed exconomy, doesn't mattter what kind of economy or government one has, SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

If the working class is tapped out, if they are not making enough money, then it falls to those who are making enough money to pay for it.

I'll be all for a FLAT TAX system when we have a FLAT INCOME society.

But until then?

Them what has the gold have to pay more than them what ain't, or we can borrow our way into bankruptsy (which is what we are doing right now)

 

[Ravi]

What do you mean by flat income society?

 

[busara]

you want to give legs up... I'm all for that... I fully support charities that do such noble work... but that is yours and my VOLUNTARY choice of what we support in those efforts... that is not the job of a government based on liberty, freedom, and equality (and all the positives AND NEGATIVES that come from those concepts/rights)

exactly, equality. people are born into inequality and have to fight to catch up. but youre right, charities can probably do it better than the govt. they are just limited in resources, funding, etc. no easy fixes that i can see, unfortunately.

 

[Ravi]

exactly, equality. people are born into inequality and have to fight to catch up. but youre right, charities can probably do it better than the govt. they are just limited in resources, funding, etc. no easy fixes that i can see, unfortunately.

Why do you think charities can do better than government? I haven't seen that work out so well over time.

 

[Charles_Main]

Actually we do not just have the resources, we BUY them!!

 

[editec]

What do you mean by flat income society?

Well it would be obvious a fair tax system if everyone paid the same amount of taxes out of their same incomes.

But since that system has proven time and again to be ineffective and unworkable (that system is called communism) then I do not think that that's a very likely development, thank god.

So since we have a system in place where income distiribution is wildly dissimilar, I'm afraid we're stuck with a system of taxation where some people end up paying MOST of the taxes, and some people don't pay a damned thing.

The people who would get really screwed in a FLAT TAX system would be those people making just over the minimum incomes to pay taxes, I suspect.

That would be the upper middle class and lower upper classes.

You know engineers, doctors, lawyers, congressmen and so forth.

The billionaires would probably love it, since they can shlter (read hide) most of the real incomes as investments and expenses.

But the working class (which includes ALL professionals) would get truly screwed, I suspect.

The devil is always in the details, which is why I ask for details when people bring up this idea.