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

[DiamondDave]

So businessmen don't take risks?

taking risk does not mean something is up to luck.. all decisions, actions, guesses, etc have consequences.. there are results from everything, whether it is in your control or someone or something else's

If there is no luck involved the there is zero risk.

Luck is a bullshit premise.. why not say it is up to the gods??

There are reactions, results, etc from every action... whether they are in your control or not.. that is not luck, it is just a complex system

There is no luck

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama was just lucky to get reelected, he needs to step aside and give that luck over to others

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

taking risk does not mean something is up to luck.. all decisions, actions, guesses, etc have consequences.. there are results from everything, whether it is in your control or someone or something else's

If there is no luck involved the there is zero risk.

Luck is a bullshit premise.. why not say it is up to the gods??

There are reactions, results, etc from every action... whether they are in your control or not.. that is not luck, it is just a complex system

There is no luck

By "luck" I mean random chance, not anything divine.

By definition when you take risk you are exposed to danger. When you expose yourself to danger luck becomes a factor.

 

[DiamondDave]

If there is no luck involved the there is zero risk.

Luck is a bullshit premise.. why not say it is up to the gods??

There are reactions, results, etc from every action... whether they are in your control or not.. that is not luck, it is just a complex system

There is no luck

By "luck" I mean random chance, not anything divine.

By definition when you take risk you are exposed to danger. When you expose yourself to danger luck becomes a factor.

Uhh.. no... there are other factors as a result of other decisions, actions, reactions, etc... luck is 'pure chance', and that is not the case... there is no luck... it is the concoction of the weak

 

[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.

It's hard to argue the obvious, isn't it?

So to you, bull shit is obvious facts? You're even dumber than I had previously thought.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Luck is a bullshit premise.. why not say it is up to the gods??

There are reactions, results, etc from every action... whether they are in your control or not.. that is not luck, it is just a complex system

There is no luck

By "luck" I mean random chance, not anything divine.

By definition when you take risk you are exposed to danger. When you expose yourself to danger luck becomes a factor.

Uhh.. no... there are other factors as a result of other decisions, actions, reactions, etc... luck is 'pure chance', and that is not the case... there is no luck... it is the concoction of the weak

Pure chance occurs in nature all the time.


By your absurd logic roullete does not involve luck since there are physical laws that govern where the ball winds up.

 

[Stephanie]

Obama was just lucky to get reelected, he needs to step aside and give that luck over to others

I AGREE
and give back all that money he was LUCKY to have made while President..

 

[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.

Bull shit. Give me one example of a job that requires little work and pays enough to make you rich.

Who are you arguing with? I never said that you can get rich with little work.



Some people enjoy their day jobs more than playing video games. That is what they are lucky -- or fortunate.




Because this is true -- any member of society is rewarded by society. That is what the society is about. If you don't like it, you are free to earn your millions in an inhabited island.




Not true. Money is only yours if you have earned them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Otherwise you owe it to the people following rules, so you can get rich.

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

Colossally ignorant statement.

Colossally convincing argument

Damn you are ignorant.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

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.

Typical liberal talk.

Sounds like Obama saying, "you didn't build that".

What I have built for myself I did on my own. No one is going to take credit for my hard work. Period!

 

[DiamondDave]

By "luck" I mean random chance, not anything divine.

By definition when you take risk you are exposed to danger. When you expose yourself to danger luck becomes a factor.

Uhh.. no... there are other factors as a result of other decisions, actions, reactions, etc... luck is 'pure chance', and that is not the case... there is no luck... it is the concoction of the weak

Pure chance occurs in nature all the time.


By your absurd logic roullete does not involve luck since there are physical laws that govern where the ball winds up.

Yes.. there is... you may not have all the information that leads to the result... but it is not just pure chance...

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Uhh.. no... there are other factors as a result of other decisions, actions, reactions, etc... luck is 'pure chance', and that is not the case... there is no luck... it is the concoction of the weak

Pure chance occurs in nature all the time.


By your absurd logic roullete does not involve luck since there are physical laws that govern where the ball winds up.

Yes.. there is... you may not have all the information that leads to the result... but it is not just pure chance...

Its not pure chance. Chance is a component. Of every decision.

 

[ilia25]

Bull shit. Give me one example of a job that requires little work and pays enough to make you rich.

Who are you arguing with? I never said that you can get rich with little work.



Some people enjoy their day jobs more than playing video games. That is what they are lucky -- or fortunate.




Because this is true -- any member of society is rewarded by society. That is what the society is about. If you don't like it, you are free to earn your millions in an inhabited island.




Not true. Money is only yours if you have earned them in an inhabited island, or in lawless jungles. Otherwise you owe it to the people following rules, so you can get rich.

Colossally ignorant statement.

Colossally convincing argument

Damn you are ignorant.

You can't argue, so you curse.

 

[DiamondDave]

Pure chance occurs in nature all the time.


By your absurd logic roullete does not involve luck since there are physical laws that govern where the ball winds up.

Yes.. there is... you may not have all the information that leads to the result... but it is not just pure chance...

Its not pure chance. Chance is a component. Of every decision.

Calculation.. risk mitigation.. not 'chance'.. there is information and reason behind every action, reaction, etc.. as stated, you may not have or be able to have all the information, but that does not make it 'chance' or 'luck'... luck is the concoction to make sense of the unknown by the weak minded.. 'oh, it was bad luck'.. there is no such thing as luck

 

[GuyPinestra]

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?

It is called the tax code, and it is signed by people's representatives. Ever heard of democracy?

You fucks have already destroyed any semblance of representative democracy with your insistence on 50% +1 mob rule, so don't even TRY to tell me your Socialist bullshit is anything CLOSE to what has been enshrined in our Constitution.

You want more money? Go EARN it, you lazy fucking moron.

Like those 'rich' people did...

ETA: The 'tax code' is no kind of 'contractual relationship', either. In the REAL world you don't CHANGE the contract after it's signed.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Yes.. there is... you may not have all the information that leads to the result... but it is not just pure chance...

Its not pure chance. Chance is a component. Of every decision.

Calculation.. risk mitigation.. not 'chance'.. there is information and reason behind every action, reaction, etc.. as stated, you may not have or be able to have all the information, but that does not make it 'chance' or 'luck'... luck is the concoction to make sense of the unknown by the weak minded.. 'oh, it was bad luck'.. there is no such thing as luck

Yes there is.

If you are about to make a big business deal and an earthquake hits and smashes the whole deal to bits - you had bad luck.

 

[KissMy]

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

There are many different type of rich.

- Some do owe their fortunes to luck.
- Many on Wallstreet swindled it from savers, investors, pension funds & taxpayers.
- Then you have people like Elon Musk who worked hard for their money.
- We also have the best working inventors of all time like Nikola Tesla who was screwed by the rich.

IMHO - The Deregulated Wallstreet Casino screwed the people who worked the hardest & did the most for this country & the world. If you focused on your work inventing instead of focusing on what Wallstreet & Government was doing with your savings, investment, pension & taxes, you got fucked. Someone has to bring integrity back to markets, banking & government before this country goes further in the toilet. Bring Fiduciary Rules back to Wallstreet. The rest of us have to live with rules we hate. I know they will hate them kick & scream about them, but screw them before we get even more screwed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Democrats need to live in a country with no capital markets and no newspapers or Internet.

Just knowing someone somewhere is making money sends them into fits

 

[DiamondDave]

Its not pure chance. Chance is a component. Of every decision.

Calculation.. risk mitigation.. not 'chance'.. there is information and reason behind every action, reaction, etc.. as stated, you may not have or be able to have all the information, but that does not make it 'chance' or 'luck'... luck is the concoction to make sense of the unknown by the weak minded.. 'oh, it was bad luck'.. there is no such thing as luck

Yes there is.

If you are about to make a big business deal and an earthquake hits and smashes the whole deal to bits - you had bad luck.

The decision being made to host the meeting in San Francisco, not knowing that the tectonic plates had reached the limit of strain, not having the info in hand that the building you are in could not handle a magnitude 7 in the rain when 30 MPH winds were hitting the south side of the building etc... there are endless amounts of information.. that does not mean there is the existence of a force called luck that rewards or punishes based on nothing but random chance... it means you do not have all the information on all the factors... and you made a decision without all the information.. but the process was already in motion

luck makes ones like you feel good.. that maybe, just maybe, you were right in spite of a bad decision

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Calculation.. risk mitigation.. not 'chance'.. there is information and reason behind every action, reaction, etc.. as stated, you may not have or be able to have all the information, but that does not make it 'chance' or 'luck'... luck is the concoction to make sense of the unknown by the weak minded.. 'oh, it was bad luck'.. there is no such thing as luck

Yes there is.

If you are about to make a big business deal and an earthquake hits and smashes the whole deal to bits - you had bad luck.

The decision being made to host the meeting in San Francisco, not knowing that the tectonic plates had reached the limit of strain, not having the info in hand that the building you are in could not handle a magnitude 7 in the rain when 30 MPH winds were hitting the south side of the building etc... there are endless amounts of information.. that does not mean there is the existence of a force called luck that rewards or punishes based on nothing but random chance... it means you do not have all the information on all the factors... and you made a decision without all the information.. but the process was already in motion

Once again - I'm not talking about divine luck.

 

[Toro]

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.

Paying people "many times their salary" does not encourage productivity. In fact, it probably discourages productivity because people will choose to take more leisure and still make more. This idea is so bad, it almost sounds like it came from the French socialist party.

People should everywhere and always be compensated for their end results, otherwise what incentive is there to do a good job? Participation ribbons are a good idea on an elementary school ground but they aren't in real life.

The fact that people choose to do things that aren't valuable is exactly why we shouldn't pay them as if they were valuable.

These ideas are a great recipe for getting poor.