Zone1 What is Wrong with Inequality?

[Correll]

I think you're very wrong, the wealthiest of us are NOT entrepreneurs and investors they are people and families who have inherited wealth from those first-generation entrepreneurs and investors. They did nothing to earn their wealth but they have opportunities the rest of us never get. Would Trump be president if his father was able to pass on his business and wealth to him? He is just a good example but families like the Bushes and the Kennedys essentially occupy an upper class nobility. It is that 2nd and 3rd generation wealth I don't like.

It is a normal and healthy thing to pass on your wealth to your children.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

You have inequality because we're not all equal. Some can perform brain surgery, some can just pick crops. Some can run fast, some are in wheelchairs. So equality is a dead end concept. So you have fairness and equal opportunity. So we call all start our own businesses, we can all get ourselves in the best employable position by doing extra college courses etc..

So it all boils down to laziness, motivation, and luck.

Because some sit back and the wealth doesn't magically come their way, they blame equality. Those that get off their fat ass and work for it, tend to be at the top of the pile.

So if anyone feels hard done by, it's your own fault.

 

[rightwinger]

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

There is nothing wrong with people making money.
Lots of money.

But our tax code is written to favor the very wealthy.
Thousands of pages of tax advantages for the wealthy only a few lines for working Americans

Why give more money to those who do not need it while working Americans pay more and more for healthcare, education, living expenses?

 

[sparky]

~S~

 

[Delldude]

I don't recall reading where anyone has seriously suggested that the wealth should be spread out evenly.

Zohran says.....

 

[Woodznutz]

Oh please. It's as if everyone can go out there and get a $150,000 a year job just like that. As if there are 200 million $150,000 jobs out there.

I'm a millionaire/plus and I've never earned more than $60,000/yr. My income is about $120,000/yr. because of investments and SS, but my wages are just $60K.

 

[Woodznutz]

It is that 2nd and 3rd generation wealth I don't like.

But, this is a Godly principle.

Proverbs 13:22
A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.

 

[citygator]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

It’s the degree. I assume you think that it is wrong for 1 person to have everything and everyone else to have nothing. Not only is that not fair it is inefficient in an economy based on consumption.

Economic activity drives the world and consolidating wealth into a few hands plummets economic activity.

So its about fairness AND efficiency.

The US has moved too far toward consolidating wealth into a few super-wealthy and the rest into the hands of the wealthy which is inefficient.

Finally a too unbalanced distribution in wealth leads to revolution and violence which isn’t good for economic activity.

 

[Woodznutz]

It is a normal and healthy thing to pass on your wealth to your children.

I've had a blast accumulating wealth and my kids will have a blast spending it.

My son will pay off his student loan and home mortgage.
My daughter will give most of hers away to her lazy, good-for-nothings friends

Oh well.

 

[martybegan]

The wealthy already give back. They support massive charities. They build hospitals, establish research centers and found university chairs.

What they cannot do is support the poor. The more help the poor get, the more poor there are. The United States has the wealthiest poor on the planet. The poor have cars, at least one television set, they live with both air conditioning and heating. Normally, the poor in this country are clinically obese. Poverty being relative, the San Francisco Bay Area has as many poor, if not more poor, than the projects in Chicago. The difference is, the San Francisco poor make over $100,000 a year and scrape by on food stamps.

To the largest extent, the poor cannot be helped into moving beyond their poverty. They have a mind set that keeps them poor. Give them a windfall, no matter how large. Within a year, they will be just as poor as they ever were. This has been proven with lottery winner after lottery winner. The only beneficiaries of lottery winnings are already wealthy people on whom the winner wastes the money.

They also spend money on luxury items that have to be designed, constructed, sold by, transported, and maintained by others, all of which creates wealth for others.

 

[martybegan]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

The issue is saying "everything must be equal" and not realizing some forced equalities are worse than the inequality you are trying to get rid of.

At the basic level, the mantra "equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes" applies, but that ignores the fact that some people have better access to certain opportunities, at least specific ones.

And the real problem is you simply can never trust the people selected to force some equalities, like equality of outcome. It's the same failure of communism in that the people running the system take advantage of the system, and you get different inequalities to replace the old ones.

 

[Woodznutz]

There is nothing wrong with people making money.
Lots of money.

But our tax code is written to favor the very wealthy.
Thousands of pages of tax advantages for the wealthy only a few lines for working Americans

Why give more money to those who do not need it while working Americans pay more and more for healthcare, education, living expenses?

The tax code favors risk-takers, encourages investment. The middle class also benefits from this. Regards the poor? "They will always be with you." -J. Christ

The poor are also notably unhealthy because of their lifestyle. It is they who are collapsing the healthcare system and causing the creation of huge tax-funded programs i.e. Medicaid, that threaten to bankrupt the country.

The poor should just suck it up and "do the jobs that Americans won't do."

 

[Votto]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

Simply put, people think that coveting is a virtue, or at least, it is for the Left.

 

[Woodznutz]

Simply put, people think that coveting is a virtue, or at least, it is for the Left.

And that's all it is, jealousy and laziness.

 

[Lisa558]

Equality is about opportunity. Opportunities should be equal---what you do with your opportunity is what determines your position in life. If you choose to squander opportunities, that's on you.

….and, some people may have opportunities, but they simply do not have the traits needed to benefit from them: they don’t have the needed intelligence, or talent, or motivation, or discipline.

People are not all equal.

 

[hadit]

Welcome to the tRump *administration.

Wow, you seem to believe they are trying to equalize things across the board. Who would ever have expected that from a hater?

 

[Woodznutz]

….and, some people may have opportunities, but they simply do not have the traits needed to benefit from them: they don’t have the needed intelligence, or talent, or motivation, or discipline.

People are not all equal.

Bullseye!

 

[Woodznutz]

But our tax code is written to favor the very wealthy.
Thousands of pages of tax advantages for the wealthy only a few lines for working Americans

The rich have been held captive by the tax code for generations, until Trump. 39 percent tax on corporate profits have forced many businesses to expand beyond their desires just to protect their profits from a greedy government that needs that money to support the large indolent population that pays no taxes but keeps them in power.

 

[Moonglow]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

Ah, so we are not a Christian nation inhabited by Christians?

 

[Moonglow]

The rich have been held captive by the tax code for generations, until Trump. 39 percent tax on corporate profits have forced many businesses to expand beyond their desires just to protect their profits from a greedy government that needs that money to support the large indolent population that pays no taxes but keeps them in power.

• Larger figures for tax expenditures: Search results indicate that total tax expenditures, which include various tax breaks for both individuals and businesses, are much larger. For example, in 2024, these totaled about $1.9 trillion.

The 20-percent deduction for qualified business income alone amounted to $63 billion in 2024. Accelerated depreciation breaks resulted in nearly $67 billion in savings for a select group of corporations.