Morality of Wealth Redistribution

[Chris]

400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined.

The wealth has already been redistributed.

 

[dblack]

Exactly. The Statists have made it too easy for brood mares to scam the system.

Brood mares don't hold a candle to lobbyists when it comes to scamming the system. Just sayin'.

 

[Foxfyre]

Exactly. The Statists have made it too easy for brood mares to scam the system.

Brood mares don't hold a candle to lobbyists when it comes to scamming the system. Just sayin'.

Lobbyists aren't all bad though. The good ones can identify a need for a regulation or sell a truly good product or service. Many do extensive and excellent research thus saving the Congressperson or other government people from having to do that.

And they can't scam anybody not looking and/or willing to be scammed.

If you think it is immoral for the federal government to do wealth redistribution, as I see that it is immoral, the only way to stop it is to prevent the federal government from using the people's money to pledge or give to any special interest of any kind. If it doesn't benefit all equally from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich, the federal government isn't allowed to do it.

The poor and rich alike benefit from an interstate highway for instance. But a road built to benefit a single city (constituency) or group (voter bloc) should be prohibited.

And that would put lobbyists for special interest groups out of business.

 

[Chris]

 

[dblack]

Exactly. The Statists have made it too easy for brood mares to scam the system.

Brood mares don't hold a candle to lobbyists when it comes to scamming the system. Just sayin'.

Lobbyists aren't all bad though.

Neither are 'Brood mares'

And they can't scam anybody not looking and/or willing to be scammed.

If you think it is immoral for the federal government to do wealth redistribution, as I see that it is immoral, the only way to stop it is to prevent the federal government from using the people's money to pledge or give to any special interest of any kind. If it doesn't benefit all equally from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich, the federal government isn't allowed to do it.

The poor and rich alike benefit from an interstate highway for instance. But a road built to benefit a single city (constituency) or group (voter bloc) should be prohibited.

And that would put lobbyists for special interest groups out of business.

Agreed. I will never be possible to do that perfectly, but it should be the goal. 'Equal protection' needs to be amplified as a constitutional protection. And we need to understand that discriminatory taxation is one of the most insidious forms of this kind of inequality.

 

[bripat9643]

400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined.

The wealth has already been redistributed.

Where do libs get all these bogus economic statistics?

 

[dblack]

The frustrating thing is that the radically increasing wealth disparity is a genuine cause for concern. But those raising the issue are usually using it to justify broader and more intrusive government control over our economy and our lives. But plenty of us out here don't want to simply replace the oppressive power of concentrated wealth with the oppressive power of concentrated government.

There are things we could come to some agreement about that would make the situation better. Dropping all the tax loopholes and incentives is an example of something we could do that would satisfy both camps; It would remove privileges and advantages granted to the wealthy and, at the same time, decrease government intrusion. There are plenty of other changes we could make along these lines, changes that would have a real effect on the problem without radically expanding the scope of government. My question is, why aren't we pursuing them?

 

[georgephillip]

The frustrating thing is that the radically increasing wealth disparity is a genuine cause for concern. But those raising the issue are usually using it to justify broader and more intrusive government control over our economy and our lives. But plenty of us out here don't want to simply replace the oppressive power of concentrated wealth with the oppressive power of concentrated government.

There are things we could come to some agreement about that would make the situation better. Dropping all the tax loopholes and incentives is an example of something we could do that would satisfy both camps; It would remove privileges and advantages granted to the wealthy and, at the same time, decrease government intrusion. There are plenty of other change we could make along these lines, changes that would have a real effect on the problem without radically expanding the scope of government. My question is, why aren't we pursuing them?

Possibly because we limit our "choice" in the voting booth to Democrat OR Republican?

The meme of "tossing out all the bums" (Rs and Ds) has been around for generations.

The Internet makes it doable.

FLUSH hundreds of Republicans AND Democrats from DC in a single news cycle, and the sort of big changes you're talking about become possible.

 

[Foxfyre]

Brood mares don't hold a candle to lobbyists when it comes to scamming the system. Just sayin'.

Lobbyists aren't all bad though.

Neither are 'Brood mares'

And they can't scam anybody not looking and/or willing to be scammed.

If you think it is immoral for the federal government to do wealth redistribution, as I see that it is immoral, the only way to stop it is to prevent the federal government from using the people's money to pledge or give to any special interest of any kind. If it doesn't benefit all equally from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich, the federal government isn't allowed to do it.

The poor and rich alike benefit from an interstate highway for instance. But a road built to benefit a single city (constituency) or group (voter bloc) should be prohibited.

And that would put lobbyists for special interest groups out of business.

Agreed. I will never be possible to do that perfectly, but it should be the goal. 'Equal protection' needs to be amplified as a constitutional protection. And we need to understand that discriminatory taxation is one of the most insidious forms of this kind of inequality.

For sure nothing in life is going to be 'perfect', but we can shoot for general worthy principles and goals and elimination of as much self serving greed and corruption in government as possible is certainly a worthy goal. And the principle that it is immoral, corrupting, and produces many unintended negative consequences to take from one citizen for the benefit of another should be embraced by all.

One of the first principles in management is that you can't fix a flawed system by changing people. Our federal government system of wealth redistribution is so bad that it turns good people into bad people. It is not only corrupting for those in government but also the recipients of the redistributed wealth.

 

[The T]

Exactly. The Statists have made it too easy for brood mares to scam the system.

Brood mares don't hold a candle to lobbyists when it comes to scamming the system. Just sayin'.

Maybe true...however you have to understand that they vote with YOUR wallet, and mine...

 

[The T]

Lobbyists aren't all bad though.

Neither are 'Brood mares'

And they can't scam anybody not looking and/or willing to be scammed.

If you think it is immoral for the federal government to do wealth redistribution, as I see that it is immoral, the only way to stop it is to prevent the federal government from using the people's money to pledge or give to any special interest of any kind. If it doesn't benefit all equally from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich, the federal government isn't allowed to do it.

The poor and rich alike benefit from an interstate highway for instance. But a road built to benefit a single city (constituency) or group (voter bloc) should be prohibited.

And that would put lobbyists for special interest groups out of business.

Agreed. I will never be possible to do that perfectly, but it should be the goal. 'Equal protection' needs to be amplified as a constitutional protection. And we need to understand that discriminatory taxation is one of the most insidious forms of this kind of inequality.

For sure nothing in life is going to be 'perfect', but we can shoot for general worthy principles and goals and elimination of as much self serving greed and corruption in government as possible is certainly a worthy goal. And the principle that it is immoral, corrupting, and produces many unintended negative consequences to take from one citizen for the benefit of another should be embraced by all.

One of the first principles in management is that you can't fix a flawed system by changing people. Our federal government system of wealth redistribution is so bad that it turns good people into bad people. It is not only corrupting for those in government but also the recipients of the redistributed wealth.

It is a system that limits Liberty, produces too many hoops to jump through at the whim of Government...quite the inverse of the intent of the Founders...

Simply? It's social engineering that benefits the government and their control over us by LAW.

 

[Foxfyre]

Neither are 'Brood mares'

And they can't scam anybody not looking and/or willing to be scammed.



Agreed. I will never be possible to do that perfectly, but it should be the goal. 'Equal protection' needs to be amplified as a constitutional protection. And we need to understand that discriminatory taxation is one of the most insidious forms of this kind of inequality.

For sure nothing in life is going to be 'perfect', but we can shoot for general worthy principles and goals and elimination of as much self serving greed and corruption in government as possible is certainly a worthy goal. And the principle that it is immoral, corrupting, and produces many unintended negative consequences to take from one citizen for the benefit of another should be embraced by all.

One of the first principles in management is that you can't fix a flawed system by changing people. Our federal government system of wealth redistribution is so bad that it turns good people into bad people. It is not only corrupting for those in government but also the recipients of the redistributed wealth.

It is a system that limits Liberty, produces too many hoops to jump through at the whim of Government...quite the inverse of the intent of the Founders...

Simply? It's social engineering that benefits the government and their control over us by LAW.

More important, it is primarily used to increase the power, prestige, influence, and personal fortunes of those setting the policies and allocating the funds. It provides strong incentive to those receiving or hoping to receive those funds to keep electing those same people to office. And they will do so at the expense of the best policies for the country as a whole. Eventually many become so dependent that they no longer even try to become those who contribute rather than just receive. A sophisticated form of slavery is created.

And that, along with treading on unalienable rights of citizens, is the immorality of government forced redistribution of wealth.

Nobody has yet been able to explain how it is moral for G to forcibly confiscate wealth from The T, use a large percentage of that wealth to support G, and give the remainder to Foxfyre so that Foxfyre will vote for G to keep doing just that.

 

[Againsheila]

I have a slight problem with the math, but according to these charts, the bottom 80% have lost wealth while the top 21% have gained a lot of wealth, the top 1% has gained 150%

Yeah, I know, it adds up to 101%, that's why I have a slight problem with the math.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I have a slight problem with the math, but according to these charts, the bottom 80% have lost wealth while the top 21% have gained a lot of wealth, the top 1% has gained 150%

Yeah, I know, it adds up to 101%, that's why I have a slight problem with the math.

No one has "lost wealth"...The chart clearly shows while the two bottom quintiles wages remain steady, those in the upper three have seen wages increase.
So what?.....Is it somehow criminal for people to use their work ethic or education to improve themselves?
I get pretty pissed off when I have to think about people on the class envy train looking cross eyed at me because I did the work necessary to become more well trained and certified in my line of work which helps me to earn more money. Ya know what? **** 'em.
I'll do what I want.

 

[Sallow]

400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined.

The wealth has already been redistributed.

Where do libs get all these bogus economic statistics?

2 of those Americans have over 100 billion dollars in assets.

Think you can count that high? In your lifetime? In your kid's and your lifetime? In your kid's, yours and their kid's lifetime?

 

[thereisnospoon]

400 individuals control more wealth than 150 million Americans combined.

The wealth has already been redistributed.

Where do libs get all these bogus economic statistics?

2 of those Americans have over 100 billion dollars in assets.

Think you can count that high? In your lifetime? In your kid's and your lifetime? In your kid's, yours and their kid's lifetime?

Why is it you people think that because some have more therefore someone else MUST have less?

 

[bripat9643]

2 of those Americans have over 100 billion dollars in assets.

Think you can count that high? In your lifetime? In your kid's and your lifetime? In your kid's, yours and their kid's lifetime?

No one in the world has $100 billion in assets, so now we know the figures are entirely bogus.

What difference does it make how high I can count? What does that have to do with your unlimited envy?

 

[Chris]

2 of those Americans have over 100 billion dollars in assets.

Think you can count that high? In your lifetime? In your kid's and your lifetime? In your kid's, yours and their kid's lifetime?

No one in the world has $100 billion in assets, so now we know the figures are entirely bogus.

What difference does it make how high I can count? What does that have to do with your unlimited envy?

Envy has nothing to do with it.

The wealth has already been redistributed to the super rich through tax loopholes and a $516 TRILLION DOLLAR derivatives Ponzi scheme.

And all you can say is, "Thank you sir, may I have another!"

Click on the link...

The Richest People in America 2010 - Forbes.com

 

[Againsheila]

I have a slight problem with the math, but according to these charts, the bottom 80% have lost wealth while the top 21% have gained a lot of wealth, the top 1% has gained 150%

Yeah, I know, it adds up to 101%, that's why I have a slight problem with the math.

No one has "lost wealth"...The chart clearly shows while the two bottom quintiles wages remain steady, those in the upper three have seen wages increase.
So what?.....Is it somehow criminal for people to use their work ethic or education to improve themselves?
I get pretty pissed off when I have to think about people on the class envy train looking cross eyed at me because I did the work necessary to become more well trained and certified in my line of work which helps me to earn more money. Ya know what? **** 'em.
I'll do what I want.

Of course you will, because you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself. That's what's wrong with our country today, greed, and power only in the hands of the wealthy making sure the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. You don't give a crap because you don't work a minimum wage job. You think you're better than them because you've had better luck. Trust me, you haven't worked harder at all.

Do you know that in 1968, minimum wage had the highest spending power in history? That a minimum wage worker could afford his own apartment, to buy a car, and to go to college part time? I know because that's exactly what my brother did at the time. He worked his butt off to do it too. You don't get that same advantage with a minimum wage job today, in fact even those making more than minimum are working 2 jobs to make ends meet and don't have the time or the money for any classes to improve their lives.

YOU were LUCKY!!! That's all you have that they don't. You sure as hell didn't work any harder than they work.

 

[bripat9643]

Why is it you people think that because some have more therefore someone else MUST have less?

Because the only way a tic sucking on the government tit can get more is to take it from someone else. A tic on the ass of society cannot comprehend the concept of producing wealth. They only understand the concept of taking wealth.