Should Weath Be Redistributed?

[Callace]

Depends on what you mean fairly though. Some might think that having a company that earns you a million $ per month is unfair too and I've seen posts on this thread that claim that inheriting your parents wealth is unfair which is just ridiculous. If it's the parents fortune, they can choose whoever they wish to give it to, nothing illegal about that.

There is a lot of rent seeking in the US. There are also a lot of central banks taking inordinate risks with our money. Just look at the fiasco where JPM lost 2 billion dollars last week. The taxpayers are going to held accountable for that.

[Deleted]

I've seen posts on this thread that claim that inheriting your parents wealth is unfair which is just ridiculous. If it's the parents fortune, they can choose whoever they wish to give it to, nothing illegal about that.

You're so right!

[Callace]

Why bother? It only costs $1000 or so a year and yo get paid for learning.

You don't have to pay any of that up front? Sounds too good to be true.

[Deleted]

There are property taxes on vehicles and real estate and many luxuries. The constitution of America does not say "no taxation" is says "no taxation without representation". We have elected officials therefore the government has a right to tax as they see fit. If we don't like it then we should try to elect an official who does not support taxation. (The argument of mass media's effect on elections I think should be a separate thread.)

Actually it is not right at all. Democracy doesn't mean everything should by allowed by a majority vote. Stealing should never be allowed as it is on par with other things that are discrimination against personal liberties. For example, if 60% voted for a law that says that ugly people can't walk in public without a license, would that be ok too? Didn't think so..

[Catta]

Constitution of Iraq? Assuming you're from Denmark, I don't think theres anything in the constitution that allows the confiscation of someones wealth, even a tiny part of it. Taxes are a completely different matter but they are on the the income, not on what you already possess.

Actually yes there are - called expropriation...

[Callace]

Yes very well thought out and not inflammatory at all. I concede, how can I compete with arguments like this? Would you like a cookie?

If you made enough money to buy a house with cash as a waiter, then you were extremely lucky with tips for a very long time, whether you worked hard or were frugal or not. Frankly, I don't have any reason to believe your story. Casting your exceptional anecdote as the norm is hardly evidence of anything.

[Umbrokill]

Slackers should not get money for nothing...

[DaNoob2]

Large businesses hire professionals to find loopholes in the system. Large businesses abuse suppliers. Large businesses aren't one-hundred percent ethical.

Large businesses create jobs. Large businesses cause economic growth in the long run. Yes, the owners of these large businesses have some fantastic ideas and were genius' to get as far as they've come.

I hope you see my point.

Many of the "owners" of these large businesses are not geniuses. Many of them have no impact on their vast fortunes, they have boards of directors who do that for them. They inherit dynastic wealth. These are the blue bloods of our society, not the Donald Trumphs or Bill Gates of our society (who are not allowed in the blue blood clubs). I can dig up a good reference where Mr. Trumph talks about it. The new money business leaders are a minority in the super rich circles.

[Deleted]

Many of the "owners" of these large businesses are not geniuses. Many of them have no impact on their vast fortunes, they have boards of directors who do that for them. They inherit dynastic wealth. These are the blue bloods of our society, not the Donald Trumphs or Bill Gates of our society (who are not allowed in the blue blood clubs). I can dig up a good reference where Mr. Trumph talks about it. The new money business leaders are a minority in the super rich circles.

I would class the board of directors as part of the ownership circle. I obviously know that one man is not responsible for the development of a business.

[DaNoob2]

$100 a day is not lucky it's average. Several of my family members waited tables and I posted a link where you can see people reply with numbers ranged from $60 a shift to over $200 a shift. $100 is a fair median. It varies geographically drastically, but so do home prices. Here is a link to median home prices in US.

http://www.realestateabc.com/outlook/overall.htm

So lets do some simple math. You went to school right? Okay so lets say people save 30% of their income towards a house. Personally if you are frugal you can save a lot more that this, I know I did. So if you consider $100/day by 30 days in a month you have $3000/month income. Say you put $1k/month towards a house savings. Median home price in US per my link is $160,000USD, so it would take 160 months or 13.33 (repeating of course) years to save enough money to buy a house cash. Most mortgage notes in this country are 30 year notes. Not only is it feasible but it's easy, it's not an anecdote. I hope this information helps some readers on here to look past your poorly thought out arguments against working class people.

*edit - As a basis for comparison I generally worked "blue collar" jobs making about $100/day, sometimes less sometimes more, since I was 16. I always worked at some job and was never unemployed longer that a week or two. By the time I was 26 I saved enough to buy my house cash. I always paid all my own rent/food/entertainment expenses during that time. What I didn't do was buy a brand new sports car or $120 jeans, nor did I go to the bar every night.

[Callace]

$100 a day is not lucky it's average. Several of my family members waited tables and I posted a link where you can see people reply with numbers ranged from $60 a shift to over $200 a shift. $100 is a fair median. It varies geographically drastically, but so do home prices. Here is a link to median home prices in US.

http://www.realestateabc.com/outlook/overall.htm

So lets do some simple math. You went to school right? Okay so lets say people save 30% of their income towards a house. Personally if you are frugal you can save a lot more that this, I know I did. So if you consider $100/day by 30 days in a month you have $3000/month income. Say you put $1k/month towards a house savings. Median home price in US per my link is $160,000USD, so it would take 160 months or 13.33 (repeating of course) years to save enough money to buy a house cash. Most mortgage notes in this country are 30 year notes. Not only is it feasible but it's easy, it's not an anecdote. I hope this information helps some readers on here to look past your poorly thought out arguments against working class people.

*edit - As a basis for comparison I generally worked "blue collar" jobs making about $100/day, sometimes less sometimes more, since I was 16. I always worked at some job and was never unemployed longer that a week or two. By the time I was 26 I saved enough to buy my house cash. I always paid all my own rent/food/entertainment expenses during that time. What I didn't do was buy a brand new sports car or $120 jeans, nor did I go to the bar every night.

Well, then congratulations.

[rezoacken]

Not every rich guy/girl deserve it for sure but you can't make it a rule like that and give it to slackers either.

[Befizzled]

Yes because I'm poor and want money.

[Demithio]

I don't like the idea of forcing excessive taxes on others. However, we cant have people starving either, as that just leads to a revolution, and the wealthy will lose what they have anyway. There needs to be some sort of compromise on this issue, before we get to the point where the shit really hits the fan. One can already see the warning signs in the U.S. and other countries. Problem is, neither side wants to give an inch, which is very dangerous for the future of any free democracy.

[DeeEss]

That is insider trading, and illegal.

Unless you're in Congress.

[Skroe]

Not redistributed beyond a social safety net, but broadly speaking, people should pay for the country they want. If they want a country that just keeps the lights on, sure let's have low taxes. If they want a country that funds stuff like NASA and the NSF, it should be high.

Problem is, we got a country that wants it all but doesnt want to pay for it.

[Callace]

Since this poll has seen such longevity, I've created a similarly biased poll that portrays the opposite extreme as this one. Both are obviously part of the same grey area.
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ces-Be-Hoarded

[Killmaim Deathbringer]

Yeah, let's distribute other peoples hard earned money to give to people who've sat on their ass all their lives. Let's reward the lazy! [/sarcasm]

[Mister K]

people spending their time posting on MMO forums and playing MMO's instead of working or learning finance/stock market

Because stock market, investing and other sort of finance is beneficial for the survival of Human Species, oh wait its not.

Science/Technology > Rest

To the OP.

Well as of right now in our current society, no it shouldn't.
In a perfect society it should, but in a perfect society (not such thing as perfect since this term differs) you would not have a Monetary system since this system is flawed, filled with corruption and high crime / poverty.

---------- Post added 2012-05-13 at 09:50 PM ----------

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

Some did not work hard, there are people less fortunate which work hard but are not rich. This is a very flawed argument.

[Laize]

Because stock market, investing and other sort of finance is beneficial for the survival of Human Species, oh wait its not.

Science/Technology > Rest

If the stock market, finance and investing were NOT beneficial, they would not be profitable.

Some did not work hard, there are people less fortunate which work hard but are not rich. This is a very flawed argument.

But MOST do work hard. Generally the ones that don't are reflected in their companies' share prices.