Unequal distribution of wealth

[syrenn]

When will the right ever face that allowing too much concentration of wealth in too few hands KILLS an economy.

You can not have capitalism when all the capital is in one hand.

You then have economic slavery.

Actually, you nattering nabob of nonsense, Concentrated and Unfettered Government Power in Any Hands KILLS an economy.

Why do you hate the government our founders left us?

Why do you not understand the government the founders left us?

 

[boedicca]

When will the right ever face that allowing too much concentration of wealth in too few hands KILLS an economy.

You can not have capitalism when all the capital is in one hand.

You then have economic slavery.

Actually, you nattering nabob of nonsense, Concentrated and Unfettered Government Power in Any Hands KILLS an economy.

Why do you hate the government our founders left us?

You do not have one iota of understanding regarding the nature of the government system designed by the Founders.

 

[boedicca]

In spite of right wing rhetoric.....Nobody is looking to take away money or assets from the wealthy and give it to the poor.

But there is no denying that we currently have an unequal distribution of available wealth that is only getting worse. What we are looking at is examining those policies and benefits available to the wealthy that contribute to them accumulating more wealth while not benefitting society as a whole.

We also need to look at policies and benefits available to working class Americans that impede their ability to acquire wealth. These include affordable healthcare, education and housing

The only thing that impedes your ability to acquire wealth is you... You have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail... the same freedom every other citizen has... and it is ONLY that freedom that the government should ensure... It is not on government to give you a leg up at the expense of others for healthcare or education as an adult or a better house... nor should it be

BULLSHIT!

If you start out with a two million inheritance you have a HUGE leg up.

Why are you so consumed with envy towards a teensy tiny minority?

 

[syrenn]

In spite of right wing rhetoric.....Nobody is looking to take away money or assets from the wealthy and give it to the poor.

But there is no denying that we currently have an unequal distribution of available wealth that is only getting worse. What we are looking at is examining those policies and benefits available to the wealthy that contribute to them accumulating more wealth while not benefitting society as a whole.

We also need to look at policies and benefits available to working class Americans that impede their ability to acquire wealth. These include affordable healthcare, education and housing

The only thing that impedes your ability to acquire wealth is you... You have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail... the same freedom every other citizen has... and it is ONLY that freedom that the government should ensure... It is not on government to give you a leg up at the expense of others for healthcare or education as an adult or a better house... nor should it be

BULLSHIT!

If you start out with a two million inheritance you have a HUGE leg up.

AND? Why would you want grudge them THEIR leg up in life? Would you complain if it was you with the two million leg up?

 

[syrenn]

The only thing that impedes your ability to acquire wealth is you... You have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail... the same freedom every other citizen has... and it is ONLY that freedom that the government should ensure... It is not on government to give you a leg up at the expense of others for healthcare or education as an adult or a better house... nor should it be

BULLSHIT!

If you start out with a two million inheritance you have a HUGE leg up.

Why are you so consumed with envy towards a teensy tiny minority?

She feels the greed and envy and jealousy of wanting what other have.

 

[boedicca]

Distributed? Shouldn't wealth be earned?

Yes. That is the basic conflict.

Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.

Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.

The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.

 

[Nosmo King]

If they are being "exploited" because the CEO makes more then they do then THEY are free to leave and get a different job.

Ever live in a company town? A town where one employer dominates the economy? A steel mill, a coal mine, a factory upon which the entire town depends? And when that company leaves, what happens to the rest of the town? what happens to the community services because the tax base has dried up? What happens to the real estate values of those living there?

Sometimes opportunity is where you live and the hope of moving on is outside your grasp.

And what does any of that have to do with the "have nots" wanting what the "haves" have?

I understand what you are saying about company towns, but that has nothing to do with wealth distribution. Social "responsibility" is not wealth distribution.

Seems wealth redistribution is a problem only seen by the Right as what the world sees as "Taxation".

The Left sees wealth redistribution as the unfair and exploitative accumulation of wealth by the few for the benefit of the few and not for the benefit of those who actually produced the wealth.


How did so many Conservatives get either so fabulously wealthy they can justify their position or get so duped to think that if only a few people get rich it's a good thing for society?

 

[syrenn]

Distributed? Shouldn't wealth be earned?

Yes. That is the basic conflict.

Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.

Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.

The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.

Then how about we use that model?

Take away more from the poor in this country..and give it to the poorer in other countries. Its the same principal. My guess the poor in this country would be pisses as hell if anything was taken away from them.

 

[Big Fitz]

In spite of right wing rhetoric.....Nobody is looking to take away money or assets from the wealthy and give it to the poor.

But there is no denying that we currently have an unequal distribution of available wealth that is only getting worse. What we are looking at is examining those policies and benefits available to the wealthy that contribute to them accumulating more wealth while not benefitting society as a whole.

We also need to look at policies and benefits available to working class Americans that impede their ability to acquire wealth. These include affordable healthcare, education and housing

The only thing that impedes your ability to acquire wealth is you... You have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail... the same freedom every other citizen has... and it is ONLY that freedom that the government should ensure... It is not on government to give you a leg up at the expense of others for healthcare or education as an adult or a better house... nor should it be

BULLSHIT!

If you start out with a two million inheritance you have a HUGE leg up.

So? Not your problem. Nobody owes you an easy start, but at the same time, you should not be penalized for getting one either.

 

[Bfgrn]

Actually, you nattering nabob of nonsense, Concentrated and Unfettered Government Power in Any Hands KILLS an economy.

Why do you hate the government our founders left us?

Why do you not understand the government the founders left us?

Explain the government the founders left us and how they treated corporations.

 

[DiamondDave]

In spite of right wing rhetoric.....Nobody is looking to take away money or assets from the wealthy and give it to the poor.

But there is no denying that we currently have an unequal distribution of available wealth that is only getting worse. What we are looking at is examining those policies and benefits available to the wealthy that contribute to them accumulating more wealth while not benefitting society as a whole.

We also need to look at policies and benefits available to working class Americans that impede their ability to acquire wealth. These include affordable healthcare, education and housing

The only thing that impedes your ability to acquire wealth is you... You have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail... the same freedom every other citizen has... and it is ONLY that freedom that the government should ensure... It is not on government to give you a leg up at the expense of others for healthcare or education as an adult or a better house... nor should it be

BULLSHIT!

If you start out with a two million inheritance you have a HUGE leg up.

And that person can blow it on nose candy or paying you for anal sex or whatever else...

that person has the exact same freedom that should be supported and kept available by government...

A person with a 170 IQ has a huge leg up too... a person who can lift 400 pounds with ease has a great leg up... a person who is drop dead gorgeous has a great leg up too.. there are lots of things that exist in people that give them advantages and lots of things that they can have by chance that can give them advantages too... but that has nothing to do with you still having your freedom where your choices, actions, efforts, etc are all that keeps you from whatever you wish to obtain

But sorry winger asshole, you don't get guarantees in life.. nor do you get the fruits of another's labor or success because you want more than just the freedom to succeed, you wish some blinded subjective concept of 'fairness'... well guess what... life ain't fair... you could be born with 3 ears, you can be born and have both parents die leaving you in an orphanage, you can be raised by crack head momma, you could have cancer at 14 years old, and so many other things... but it is not government's job to eliminate chance or differences in personal situations...

 

[Nosmo King]

Distributed? Shouldn't wealth be earned?

Yes. That is the basic conflict.

Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.

Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.

The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.

Then how about we use that model?

Take away more from the poor in this country..and give it to the poorer in other countries. Its the same principal. My guess the poor in this country would be pisses as hell if anything was taken away from them.

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE IT TO SPARE! Unlike someone with a quarter million dollars a year whining and bitching about a 10% rise in their marginal tax rate!

Spoiled rotten rich bastards!

 

[DiamondDave]

Ever live in a company town? A town where one employer dominates the economy? A steel mill, a coal mine, a factory upon which the entire town depends? And when that company leaves, what happens to the rest of the town? what happens to the community services because the tax base has dried up? What happens to the real estate values of those living there?

Sometimes opportunity is where you live and the hope of moving on is outside your grasp.

And what does any of that have to do with the "have nots" wanting what the "haves" have?

I understand what you are saying about company towns, but that has nothing to do with wealth distribution. Social "responsibility" is not wealth distribution.

Seems wealth redistribution is a problem only seen by the Right as what the world sees as "Taxation".

The Left sees wealth redistribution as the unfair and exploitative accumulation of wealth by the few for the benefit of the few and not for the benefit of those who actually produced the wealth.


How did so many Conservatives get either so fabulously wealthy they can justify their position or get so duped to think that if only a few people get rich it's a good thing for society?

Mommy... life ain't fair... wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhh wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[syrenn]

Ever live in a company town? A town where one employer dominates the economy? A steel mill, a coal mine, a factory upon which the entire town depends? And when that company leaves, what happens to the rest of the town? what happens to the community services because the tax base has dried up? What happens to the real estate values of those living there?

Sometimes opportunity is where you live and the hope of moving on is outside your grasp.

And what does any of that have to do with the "have nots" wanting what the "haves" have?

I understand what you are saying about company towns, but that has nothing to do with wealth distribution. Social "responsibility" is not wealth distribution.

Seems wealth redistribution is a problem only seen by the Right as what the world sees as "Taxation".

The Left sees wealth redistribution as the unfair and exploitative accumulation of wealth by the few for the benefit of the few and not for the benefit of those who actually produced the wealth.


How did so many Conservatives get either so fabulously wealthy they can justify their position or get so duped to think that if only a few people get rich it's a good thing for society?

I am not fabulously wealthy....but the left would still take from me to give to the poor. I work hard for what i have, i don't work so that it can be taxed away for others to enjoy what i earn.

 

[Big Fitz]

The only spoiled bastards I see are the ones being given something they or their family did not earn but believe they are entitled to a taste of the action.

 

[syrenn]

Yes. That is the basic conflict.

Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.

Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.

The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.

Then how about we use that model?

Take away more from the poor in this country..and give it to the poorer in other countries. Its the same principal. My guess the poor in this country would be pisses as hell if anything was taken away from them.

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE IT TO SPARE! Unlike someone with a quarter million dollars a year whining and bitching about a 10% rise in their marginal tax rate!

Spoiled rotten rich bastards!

I am sure many poor in other countries would consider the poor in this country spoiled rotten rich bastards too.

Charity is not something that should be forced upon anyone.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'd like to know why the unequal distribution of wealth is a bad thing. This seems to be a major premise from those on the left, but it's like you just assume it's a bad thing without every really providing evidence or justifying the premise.

You are asking why thermometers are a bad thing. If you're in the desert or the Arctic, it might save your life.

Unequal wealth distribution is not a 'problem', it's a symptom, an indicator of how all members of a society are doing. The important question in America today is why there is such a growing disparity.

Conservatives refuse to even acknowledge it, much less address it.

 

[Big Fitz]

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE IT TO SPARE!

The poor in this nation are wealthier than 90% of the poor in the rest of the world. Therefore, they are wealthy in comparison. They should be made equal.

 

[boedicca]

Yes. That is the basic conflict.

Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.

Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.

The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.

Then how about we use that model?

Take away more from the poor in this country..and give it to the poorer in other countries. Its the same principal. My guess the poor in this country would be pisses as hell if anything was taken away from them.

BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE IT TO SPARE! Unlike someone with a quarter million dollars a year whining and bitching about a 10% rise in their marginal tax rate!

Spoiled rotten rich bastards!

Talk about stereotype.

Elevating NEED above liberty and productivity leads to a downward spiral for everyone.

 

[Big Fitz]

Unlike someone with a quarter million dollars a year whining and bitching about a 10% rise in their marginal tax rate!

At a quarter million a year, you are looking more around 35% income tax. Then there are all the other excise taxes we pay. Property taxes on what they own, state taxes, consumption taxes, fees and licenses. Huh... how much do you think that racks up over time? I know that many state income taxes on the 'wealthy' approach 9% in the worst states and 5% in others. So now we're up to 40-45% about. How much of the price of gas is taxes? About 30-40%, so there's that cost too. Telecom taxes make up a hefty portion of your communication costs. Cable/satellite taxes, property taxes (and believe me they have bigger ones than most because they bought nicer and safer).

You see how this "Only 10%" bullshit quickly becomes "Only 75%"? Just because it's not all paid every April 15th doesn't mean they're undertaxed.

Oh and most of those other taxes, are regressive. Afflicting the poor more than the rich. You willing to start repealing those taxes????