redistribution of wealth

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2008
63,085
9,749
2,040
Portland, Ore.
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.
 
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.

Wealth in the hands of those who earn it is the correct thing. If you work for a person for a set amount of money that money is yours. You do this on the day you apply for a job. Nothing more nothing less. Anything else is theft
 
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.

Wealth in the hands of those who earn it is the correct thing. If you work for a person for a set amount of money that money is yours. You do this on the day you apply for a job. Nothing more nothing less. Anything else is theft


Earn it is one thing. Earn it through oppression and manipulation is another. Let's see..for some reason derivatives and oil speculators come to mind.
 
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.

Wealth in the hands of those who earn it is the correct thing. If you work for a person for a set amount of money that money is yours. You do this on the day you apply for a job. Nothing more nothing less. Anything else is theft


Earn it is one thing. Earn it through oppression and manipulation is another. Let's see..for some reason derivatives and oil speculators come to mind.

Horseshit. The day you accept the job and the income is decided is all that you should expect to receive.
 
The wealthy never obtained their wealth by taking it from the poor and working class. All they did was ensure the rules were in place to enable them to gain and maintain wealth. Tax cuts, exemptions, subsidies, minimum wage restrictions, protective tariffs all enacted supposedly to "create jobs"
Reversing the trend does not involve taking money back from the wealthy but reducing those programs that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class
 
"Do not waste your time on Social Questions. What is the matter with the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness." George Bernard Shaw

The Conservative Nanny State and see [ame]http://www.amazon.com/United-States-since-World-Since/dp/0521677556/[/ame]



"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."UBI and the Flat Tax
 
Last edited:
The wealthy never obtained their wealth by taking it from the poor and working class. All they did was ensure the rules were in place to enable them to gain and maintain wealth. Tax cuts, exemptions, subsidies, minimum wage restrictions, protective tariffs all enacted supposedly to "create jobs"
Reversing the trend does not involve taking money back from the wealthy but reducing those programs that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class

give me half of your money, because it's the right thing to do.
 
Wealth in the hands of those who earn it is the correct thing. If you work for a person for a set amount of money that money is yours. You do this on the day you apply for a job. Nothing more nothing less. Anything else is theft


Earn it is one thing. Earn it through oppression and manipulation is another. Let's see..for some reason derivatives and oil speculators come to mind.

Horseshit. The day you accept the job and the income is decided is all that you should expect to receive.

Double horseshit on you! The rich manipulate the market and wages. sadly in a very selfish manner as witnessed by the OMB for the last few decades.
 
The wealthy never obtained their wealth by taking it from the poor and working class. All they did was ensure the rules were in place to enable them to gain and maintain wealth. Tax cuts, exemptions, subsidies, minimum wage restrictions, protective tariffs all enacted supposedly to "create jobs"
Reversing the trend does not involve taking money back from the wealthy but reducing those programs that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class

give me half of your money, because it's the right thing to do.

Get a job loser
 
The wealthy never obtained their wealth by taking it from the poor and working class

So just where did they get it? Did they print it?
 
The wealthy never obtained their wealth by taking it from the poor and working class. All they did was ensure the rules were in place to enable them to gain and maintain wealth. Tax cuts, exemptions, subsidies, minimum wage restrictions, protective tariffs all enacted supposedly to "create jobs"
Reversing the trend does not involve taking money back from the wealthy but reducing those programs that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class

give me half of your money, because it's the right thing to do.

Get a job loser

You want half of someones else money so I thought you wouldn't mind giving me half of yours.
 
Earn it is one thing. Earn it through oppression and manipulation is another. Let's see..for some reason derivatives and oil speculators come to mind.

Horseshit. The day you accept the job and the income is decided is all that you should expect to receive.

Double horseshit on you! The rich manipulate the market and wages. sadly in a very selfish manner as witnessed by the OMB for the last few decades.

No they can't they cannot force you to work for a wage you will not except and if you have a specialty then they are at your mercy
 
Redistribution of wealth, LITERALLY, requires taking away freedom. It requires men with guns to take wealth and resources away from some who have it to give it to those who do not.

Thats the problem.

Since COUNTLESS studies show that conservatives are MORE charitable than liberals, it's not giving wealth to the needy we have problems with. Is forcibly taking it that is a problem.
 
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.

Robbery is an immoral act regardless who is doing it.
 
Get a job loser

You want half of someones else money so I thought you wouldn't mind giving me half of yours.

Are you bitching about contributing to our society?

Conservatives More Charitable than Liberal Scrooges - HUMAN EVENTS

No. We, the right wing, are more charitable than you communist lefties. Its not giving to the needy we have a problem with. Thats you all's problem.

Our problem is gov't force taking it from us.

When you motherfuckers get MORE charitable than us, then you can comment on who gives to society.
 
You want half of someones else money so I thought you wouldn't mind giving me half of yours.

Are you bitching about contributing to our society?

Conservatives More Charitable than Liberal Scrooges - HUMAN EVENTS

No. We, the right wing, are more charitable than you communist lefties. Its not giving to the needy we have a problem with. Thats you all's problem.

Our problem is gov't force taking it from us.

When you motherfuckers get MORE charitable than us, then you can comment on who gives to society.

That's not contributing........pay for schools, fire, police, roads, military

Charity does not do that
 
One sees the 'Conservatives' react as if one has suggested immoral acts at the mention of wealth redistribution by whatever means. Socialism, communism, fascism, what ever favorite term of the moment is applied to any such suggestion.

Yet one can clearly see the rank hypocracy of the right wing when you consider that for the last 40 years we have been seeing massive wealth redistribution from the working poor and the middle class to the very wealthy. And nary a peep from the 'Conservatives'.

It seems that only wealth redistribution from the very wealthy to the rest of us is considered bad. Wealth going the other way seems to be considered a good thing to these people. So, wealth going to those that have little to those that have much is a good thing, but wealth going the other way is a bad thing. A very interesting philosophy.

The premise of you argument is based on false logic. You speak of wealth as though it is a finite thing, as though it cannot be created or destroyed. That is not reality. Therefore, when you observe the very richest percentile of Americans increase their overall wealth over a period of time while other segments of the population saw their wealth decrease, you conclude one "took it" from another. That too is not reality. The reasons for these changes in wealth ("redistribution" is an incorrect term here) are varied and worthy of discussion...but let's stick to the point at hand.

When fiscally minded people criticize wealth distribution, we are talking about the forcible taking of wealth from some citizens and distributing it to other citizens in the form of entitlements. Changes in wealth among citizens of varied income and net worth percentiles is a legitimate topic for discussion. Suggesting the poor redistributed their wealth to the richest Americans is not. It's absurd.
 

Forum List

Back
Top