Should Weath Be Redistributed?

[Sigma]

Should Wealth Be Redistributed ?
No, they worked for it, they earned it, it is theirs to do with as they please.
however they should be encouraged (via tax breaks) to invest that money into creating new jobs, and job opportunities such as new business, this way they help people to help themselves without directly giving them a handout.

[Jakzz]

idk wtf Weath is

[Tilie]

No, if you work for your money, you should not have to be forced to give it away.

[Mikael123]

So nearly 3/4 of the voters think no one should pay tax?

[Twizy]

I voted no, but in a sense, it depends on how much the wealthy people would get.

Like say, if it was billions upon billions that couldn't be spent within a lifetime, then I'd say yes. But if it was a few million that could be spent within that said person's life time, then no, it shouldn't. They worked for the money, so they should be able to keep their money.

Aren't you contradicting yourself and why do you get to set a limit on how much money someone has? It simply doesn’t matter how much money anyone has it’s not yours and no one should be able to give you someone else’s money.

[Kaosbringer]

Not an American so I can only given an opinion from the outside looking in.

Redistribution of wealth is not the way to solve Americas disparity between the wealthy and the poor (which is very large compared to say Canada where middle class is the standard). Well I'm not saying that the American government could be doing more to help there citizens (which is what they should have been doing rather then spend 2 trillion on there military) they should be focusing on creating more/better jobs and promote higher learning to meet the standards that many of today's jobs require.

[Commissarr]

I don't think it should.

Most rich people have worked their asses off to get where they are and/or have and deserve to be rewarded for their innovation.

I really don't see how people struggle to earn money, especially in places like the UK and US.

As for working harder = more money - That's pretty naive as well. Should someone working in a store that's walking 15 miles a day just at work be paid more than a banker that sits in a $500 chair on the phone all day? No. People are paid what they are for a reason. How hard you work doesn't really matter, it's the results you produce or the revenue you generate that typically determines how much a certain role would get paid, that and supply and demand for the job.

Anyway, definitely not to redistribution. I respect people that have made millions/billions; I don't respect people that want to tax them heavily or moan... Most likely because they don't possess what it takes to be successful in their current line of work or they don't have any apparent skills that would enable them to earn as much or even close.

[zuluslayer]

After a brief look at the american society, i'l vote yes to a certain degree. Lots of people in the U.S lives like people in a third world contry despite living in modern society.

[Mikael123]

No, if you work for your money, you should not have to be forced to give it away.

So you want a society with no state employes such as policemen, firefighters and people in the military?

[Darkfriend]

We all know communism is bad. Because communism gives money to all people indiscriminately. System is not fine as it is, but obviously we're better than communism.

I propose people get paid based on how hard they work. There are a lot of people who don't work that hard and are rich, and those who work harder than anyone else and are poor. Money should be distributed on a merit-based system. Earn your money.

Doesn't make sense. A stupid person can work damn hard, and make little because he is DUMB. He doesn't contribute as much as the smart person who spends less effort for greater outcomes. Effort is a terrible indicator. Efficiency would be better. The least expended for the greatest outcome.

Heck, if you went by that scale, my degree+law school once finished (costing upwards of 150k in many cases) would be meaningless, compared to the person working at burger king. Effort is a terrible indicator. So easy to mess with too. Just be inefficient, more effort than would be more money! Such a lame idea.

[ishootblanks]

Do you think we should redistribute the wealth of rich people who have worked so hard to get where they are?


Why or Why not?


In my opinion, innovation does not come from slacking and waiting around for government hand outs, it comes from honest, efficient, hard working people that bring something different to the table.


What about you?

money should belong to the person who earns it..

but on the same note.. money has no value if it's not used..

[IIamaKing]

I have yet to me one rich kid that wasn't a self-entitled piece of shit because mommy and daddy have money so I never have to do anything for myself or earn anything for myself. Why should I? Mommy will breast feed me everything I need!

So yes, i say redistribute it, and here is how IMO:

Bill Gates told his children he would pay for any amount of schooling they wanted, but they weren't going to get a cent when he died. Fucking brilliant. Instead he is sending his money to various charities etc.

I would like to see all the wealthy people do this. He kids, we will spare no expense in your education so you can do great things, but you aren't getting a cent outside of that, you have to earn it for yourself.

In essence, the wealthy don't have their money taken and redistributed while they are still around, but after they have passed. No leaving it to a geenration of degenerate asshole douchebags that couldn't hold down a regular job if their life literally depended on it.

Redistributed wealth should go to better healthcare and educational oppourtunities for all, as well as a multitude of other things to better ourselves as a nation.

This is a fine CHOICE to make with ones money. I like CHOICES they are the base of liberty.

OT. No. People earned it one way or another and it is theirs is to do with as they please. Money held by private citizens is not a piggy bank for the over spending entitlement creating government to dip into when they see fit. And that is all "redistribution" means.

The government makes problems not solutions, Enterprising individuals with money SOLVES problems.

[Bearshield]

Hell no, you earn what you work for.

[golds]

Why are some of you thinking not redistributing wealth = no taxes at all?

[Wells]

Why are some of you thinking not redistributing wealth = no taxes at all?

Because taxes are fundamentally redistribution in a western society.

[ishootblanks]

After a brief look at the american society, i'l vote yes to a certain degree. Lots of people in the U.S lives like people in a third world contry despite living in modern society.

that's primarily due to choice.. you have to keep in mind those "third world" conditions usually include a big screen TV.. iphone.. the latest in trendy shoes.. and cable TV..

[Onemanwolfpack]

No, the wealth should not be "redistributed". Should things be done to reduce the disparity in income between the top and the bottom? Yes, yes, a million times yes.

[Snakeseye0]

I think that a single person getting so much money is just a shame. It takes more than one person to build that much wealth, and it's not fair to be taking more than half the profits. I mean if we put a CEO in a room with a person who works at McDonald's and take away all the money they have and put them in the same cloths, what do you get? Two humans. Money should not be deciding who lives and who doesn't, and why are they are all of a sudden better than everyone else because they have more paper?

I mean for our capitalistic society to survive we HAVE to have poor people, and it saddens me when people on these forums constantly demonize and put down people who cannot even defend themselves. I mean THATS THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSE TO BE. I would rather live in a society were everyone has a chance.

[Mikael123]

Why are some of you thinking not redistributing wealth = no taxes at all?

Because if Joe pays 100 dollars in tax that money goes for example to pay the police officer Tom. Money is redistributed from Joe to pay for Tom's salary.

[ishootblanks]

Because taxes are fundamentally redistribution in a western society.

there will always be "some" redistribution.. but I think what OP is referring to is the over the top blatant taking from person A to give to person B like in the case of Earned Income Credit.. etc..

(to the non-americans.. EIC is basically a 4000-7000 dollar "gift" given to people who make certain criteria.. typically the people who get EIC pay 0% income tax.. so this isn't just a big refund.. this is pure redistribution.. most people who collect EIC get more than I pay in at all)