Morality of Wealth Redistribution

[thereisnospoon]

This country does not like freeloaders....

.....But, loves the shit outta hustlers, rip-offs, and every other kind o' "conservative" trash!!!​

"people should all just teach their kids to steal whatever they can get their hands on, whenever they can get their hands on it.

- after all, that's the morality that drives the "winner" class."

Reaganbushenomics​

Ya know what biker boy? That motorcycle in your avatar has a higher IQ than you.

 

[DiamondDave]

Define "earn". Somehow I don't believe CEO's "earn" 500 times more money than their employees.

Yeah... the CEO skillset, depth of knowledge, risk, commitment, etc is such a common thing that any of their employees can do it

Let alone the fact that you can ask for, demand, negotiate whatever is in the range that fits the need for both sides (employer and potential employee)... and because of the limited amount of people who can actually perform and run a multi million or billion dollar corporation, those who can will demand a hefty sum

Gregory F.A. Pierce (co-founder, Business Executives for Social Justice, 2001): "From a spiritual point of view, it cannot be true that the work of the CEOs of some companies is worth a thousand times that of some other of their employees, just as it cannot be true that because you can get people to work full time for minimum wage they are justly compensated."

An activist.. seriously???

epic fail

 

[thereisnospoon]

Obama has created record debt, record poverty, record foreclosures, record war spending and record food stamp programs



Is that what educated democrats call progress?


LOL


Democrats create ghettos


Nothing more

every single American city that has gone democrat has seen it's residents taxed to the point where they decided to vote with their feet. That left behind the people incapable or unwilling to escape the high taxes, crime and shitty government of inner cities.
Even in states with very liberal annexation laws which allow cities to gobble up land and "bring back" escaping taxpayers, cities still lose population lose wealth and see their inner parts fall into decay.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Having one's fire put out at the expense of another would qualify I think.

No. Party B does not receive the weath generated by party A, and so the wealth was, by defintion, not redistributed to party B.

But Party B does receive a benefit not available to Party A.

That's not redistribution of wealth. The wealth does not change hands between parties. For the wealth to be redistributed, it must reach Party B.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Show how the local fire department redistibutes wealth - that is, how it takes from the haves and gives to the have nots.

Simple.
This particular 'public' service offers much greater value to the owner of an expensive home, located relatively close to a fire station, than it does to the owner of a decrepit shack located so far away from the nearest fire station that even in the event of a fire they wouldn't be much help.

Fail. The wealth does not transfer from A to B, and so it was not redistributed.

Edit: My apologies. You asked me to show how it takes from haves and gives to have nots. In this case it's actually the other way around. But it's still redistribution of wealth.

Only if you self-servingly redefine the term to suit your needs.

 

[The T]

Actually, there are a lot of people leaving, we have millions of Americans living off shore and hundreds if not thousands actually renouncing their American citizenship every year. Why do you think the Gov't is trying to force foreign banks to report American accounts exceeding $10,000? It's because we have a lot of Americans and their money leaving.

It ain't all taxes of course, there's other reasons. But there's a lot of places where you can live pretty high on the hog for a lot less money. And a lot of places where you can move your business or start a new one and be more profitable than here. How stupid is that, our own gov'ts policies are incentivizing Americans to leave and disincentivizing foreign investors to go elsewhere.

Precisely. And it is all for the sake of control on the part of an overzealous,overbearing Federal Government that have forgotten thier place...and really need to be reminded.

I think they got reminded last november, but maybe it didn't take.

Which is why Obama chose to ratchet up his re-election bid early...he knows he's in trouble, and do many Statists in both houses. And they're doing a dilly of a job painting themselves into a corner because they didn't get the message the first time.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Horsepucky.

Show how the local fire department redistibutes wealth - that is, how it takes from the haves and gives to the have nots.

It would be redistribution of wealth if the taxes to fund the Fire Department were taken from the rich man but used only to put out the poor man's fires. As long as the rich man benefits equally in fire protection, there is no redistribution of wealth.

What about taxing a childless person to fund schools?

There's no transfer of wealth, and thus, no redistribution.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Show how the local fire department redistibutes wealth - that is, how it takes from the haves and gives to the have nots.

Simple.
This particular 'public' service offers much greater value to the owner of an expensive home, located relatively close to a fire station, than it does to the owner of a decrepit shack located so far away from the nearest fire station that even in the event of a fire they wouldn't be much help.

Fail. The wealth does not transfer from A to B, and so it was not redistributed.

Edit: My apologies. You asked me to show how it takes from haves and gives to have nots. In this case it's actually the other way around. But it's still redistribution of wealth.

Only if you self-servingly redefine the term to suit your needs.

I'd ask the OP if he considers the location and type of house in which one decides to live a "choice".
If one chooses to live in the sticks, far from the nearest fire station ,should the person who decided to live closer to said fire station, be punished or penalized?

 

[Spoonman]

Yes there certainly is a world of difference.

The key to unraveling the difference is whether the wealth that's taxed by government is actually giving the taxpayer something of value.

When government isn't working well, when they do not give good value for the taxes they take from the citizens, then it is perfectly reasonable for citizens to object to that tax and that goverment.

In the case of all but (I think) a very SMALL percentage of the population, our government does NOT give back nearly what it ought to give back to taxpayers.

The most aggrieved citizens are, in my opinion, the middle and EVEN most of upper classes.

Now there are obviously exceptions to that of course.

But generally speaking working people -- even working people who are making middle SIX FIGURES or low SEVEN figures are being taxed inappropriately for the VALUE they recieve.

Of course I have very little sympathy for those top 1% of the population who are complaining that they are overtaxed.

Obviously they are recieiving great benefit from being citizens in this nation and what they pay in taxes to government seems fair enough given the benefits they must be getting by being citizens of this nation,

BUT if they think that they are overtaxed, those ATLASES ought to SHRUG OFF that horrid burden of taxation and find another nation where they'll be more appreciated.

But you know...they don't leave, Fixfyre.

Why not?

I suspect its because there's no place where they're better treated or would be taxed at a lower rate than the USA.

Actually, there are a lot of people leaving, we have millions of Americans living off shore and hundreds if not thousands actually renouncing their American citizenship every year. Why do you think the Gov't is trying to force foreign banks to report American accounts exceeding $10,000? It's because we have a lot of Americans and their money leaving.

It ain't all taxes of course, there's other reasons. But there's a lot of places where you can live pretty high on the hog for a lot less money. And a lot of places where you can move your business or start a new one and be more profitable than here. How stupid is that, our own gov'ts policies are incentivizing Americans to leave and disincentivizing foreign investors to go elsewhere.

Precisely. And it is all for the sake of control on the part of an overzealous,overbearing Federal Government that have forgotten thier place...and really need to be reminded.

this federal government is doing more to userp the states power more than any before it.

 

[Bern80]

Correct.

And the 'necessary evil' = some level of collection and redistribution of wealth.

The only issue up for intellectually honest debate here is what constitutes the fairest levels and methods of collection and redistribution. Narrowly defining redistribution to only include programs one opposes constitutes a feeble attempt to apply rigid black & white reasoning to a subjective determination of fairness. And that's ubertarded.

True there can be different defintions of fair. But demanding more of some just because they have more does not fit any definition of the word fair. Taxing people nothing just because they have little also does not fit any definition of fair.

You want the rich to be taxed more yet the fact is taxing the more will not provide you the extra money for all your precious government entitlements. Regardless of you manipulate the tax code, tax revenues always tend to stay between %15-%20 of GDP.

The 'definition' of fair ain't got squat to do with it. It's one's subjective 'determination' of fair that is at issue. And due to the subjectivity of the matter, opinions naturally vary.

Essentially a chicken shit way of saying I can't defend my made up definition of a word.

 

[Spoonman]

This country does not like freeloaders....

.....But, loves the shit outta hustlers, rip-offs, and every other kind o' "conservative" trash!!!​

"people should all just teach their kids to steal whatever they can get their hands on, whenever they can get their hands on it.

- after all, that's the morality that drives the "winner" class."

Reaganbushenomics​

Ya know what biker boy? That motorcycle in your avatar has a higher IQ than you.

i view shaman as like the spam advertising that pops up here. I don't even bother reading his trash

 

[Mr.Nick]

Wow, stealing is immoral.

Taking property from an individual via threat constitutes stealing, err better yet extortion.

ANY tax that is not a sales tax is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

 

[snjmom]

But demanding more of some just because they have more does not fit any definition of the word fair. Taxing people nothing just because they have little also does not fit any definition of fair.

No, that's called good fiscal sense. Like Willie said, it's where the money is.

 

[Bern80]

But demanding more of some just because they have more does not fit any definition of the word fair. Taxing people nothing just because they have little also does not fit any definition of fair.

No, that's called good fiscal sense. Like Willie said, it's where the money is.

Something can make good fiscal sense and still not be fair. Of course it makes sense in terms generating a large revenue. It's why the government has to tax people on a percentage basis rather than collecting the same amount of money from everyone. However it is also only good fiscal sense if you simply take as a given that government actually NEEDS all that money in the first place.

 

[bripat9643]

But demanding more of some just because they have more does not fit any definition of the word fair. Taxing people nothing just because they have little also does not fit any definition of fair.

No, that's called good fiscal sense. Like Willie said, it's where the money is.

In other words, taxation is founded on the moral code of a bank robber.

I love it when libs admit truths they didn't want to admit.

 

[Chris]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I have a great book on the subject...it's called the Bible.

Love thy neighbor as thyself - Jesus.

When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong.

 

[Spoonman]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I have a great book on the subject...it's called the Bible.

Love thy neighbor as thyself - Jesus.

When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong.

separation of church and state bro. don't go looking to bring religion into this argument. you libs took jesus out of the equation, remember

 

[Spoonman]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I have a great book on the subject...it's called the Bible.

Love thy neighbor as thyself - Jesus.

When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong.

"When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong."

yea, we have a group of entitled, do nothing slugs at the bottom looking for their handout instead of making a living on their own.

 

[Chris]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I have a great book on the subject...it's called the Bible.

Love thy neighbor as thyself - Jesus.

When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong.

separation of church and state bro. don't go looking to bring religion into this argument. you libs took jesus out of the equation, remember

No one can take Jesus out of the equation, my friend.

 

[Chris]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I have a great book on the subject...it's called the Bible.

Love thy neighbor as thyself - Jesus.

When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong.

"When the top 400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined, something is very, very wrong."

yea, we have a group of entitled, do nothing slugs at the bottom looking for their handout instead of making a living on their own.

So the people working at McDonalds are do nothings, and the hedge fund managers are "making a living on their own?"