Why the rich owe their fortunes to luck as much as to anything else

[ilia25]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

 

[martybegan]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Some do, like lottery winners and inheritance

Still, they owe you nothing

 

[jillian]

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

i've never heard people say take "most" of other people's money... although the top tax rates used to be much higher.

i'm still having trouble fathoming why anyone would have a problem living with what they thrived on when clinton was president.

seems to be it's pretty bogus fauxrage.

 

[martybegan]

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

i've never heard people say take "most" of other people's money... although the top tax rates used to be much higher.

i'm still having trouble fathoming why anyone would have a problem living with what they thrived on when clinton was president.

seems to be it's pretty bogus fauxrage.

The OP's premise is that after say 5x to 10x the average salary, everything else should go to the government.

Also, during the 40's and 50's the highest rate applied to maybe a couple hundred taxpayers? We were also paying off WWII and the Marshall Plan. We dont have a crisis like that, at least not one we didnt create ourselves.

 

[ilia25]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

It would be their money if they earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got to the top because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe most of their fortunes to those people.

 

[martybegan]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

It would be their money if they would earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got their income because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe to those people.

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

Again, go out and get a gun and get the money yourself. Of course we know you are far too much of a pussy to do that.

 

[ilia25]

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

It would be their money if they would earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got their income because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe to those people.

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

 

[GuyPinestra]

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

i've never heard people say take "most" of other people's money... although the top tax rates used to be much higher.

i'm still having trouble fathoming why anyone would have a problem living with what they thrived on when clinton was president.

seems to be it's pretty bogus fauxrage.

Tell that ^^^ to the government and we might get somewhere...

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

This is without a doubt one of the most profoundly stupid things I have ever read.

Congrats!!

 

[GuyPinestra]

It would be their money if they would earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got their income because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe to those people.

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

Really?? Can you show me a copy of it and tell me who SIGNED it?

 

[martybegan]

It would be their money if they would earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got their income because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe to those people.

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

You are not asking for a bit more, you are asking for all of it. Never mind that such a limit on income would crash industries such as housing, high end automobiles, resturants, vacations spots, and all others that depend on disposable income.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

You are not asking for a bit more, you are asking for all of it. Never mind that such a limit on income would crash industries such as housing, high end automobiles, resturants, vacations spots, and all others that depend on disposable income.

This person must be joking... nobody can be that stupid.

 

[Some Guy]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

How old are you?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

Holy. Shit.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Another stunning OP from a Graduate of the Business School of Mom's Basement

You useful idiots don't HAVE to live up to your name on a daily basis

 

[beretta304]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

Nothing new coming out of this rethread of a poster.

There is EVERYTHING wrong with people having to give up most of thier income, regardless of how much they make, in taxes.

If you want other people's money, do the honorable thing and rob them. Dont make the government do it for you.

It would be their money if they earn them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Then they would owe nothing to any one else.

But that is not the case. The rich got to the top because the way our society is set up, because many other people follow its rules and make right decisions every day. The rich owe most of their fortunes to those people.

Here we go again with yet another version of "You didn't build that" horseshit.

 

[ilia25]

No one owes anyone anything, unless there is a contractural relationship between them.

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

You are not asking for a bit more, you are asking for all of it.

There is no reason to become hysterical here. A 70% marginal rate on incomes above 500K is hardly "all of it".

 

[PredFan]

The concept is really simple -- most people get rich becuase they love what they do for a living. And they are good at it. And, as chance would have it, the things they like to do are in demand by others -- so they also are getting paid well.

Many other people have no such luck. They like to do things that others do not find all that valuable. Or they don't possess enough talents to compete with those who do. Those people have to work hard to earn a basic living and the money is the main thing that motivates them to work.

That is why the rich are so fortunate. And that is why asking them to pay higher taxes is only fair. Also that is why higher taxes would not discourage them from working -- remember, they are not providing their services just for money!

I believe that a society should reward people primary for their efforts -- and much less the end result, as the productivity can change dramatically between the different lines of work. The society should encourage higher productivity as well by allowing some inequality -- by letting people take home many times the average salary.

But there is nothing wrong if people making millions would have to give up most of their income in taxes.

The premise here is bull shit. No discussion can follow from it.

 

[beretta304]

But there is a contractual relationship already -- it says that the rich must pay most of taxes in this country. We should change is so they pay a bit more.

You are not asking for a bit more, you are asking for all of it.

There is no reason to become hysterical here. A 70% marginal rate on incomes above 500K is hardly "all of it".

Punish the successful so they will all be losers like you.