rhaig 0 #276 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. so you just don't want people to inherit their relative's wealth? That would be a massive inheritance tax you're wanting (double taxation). And could be a way out of poverty for some. STRAW MAN. I didn't say that. But yes, there should be an inheritance tax. And your silly "double taxation" argument has been debunked repeatedly. what you did say is you don't have a problem with people having wealth if they earned it. Implying you have a problem with people having wealth if they didn't earn it. To me, this says they were given it. That's where I drew my conclusion. What I left out was the word "all". you don't want people to inherit all of their relatives wealth. and in your reply, you confirm this, with your agreement to an inheritance tax. Quote Quote Yes, I think there SHOULD be a wealth tax, for both practical (good way of raising needed revenue) and social (the incredible disparity in wealth right now is unhealthy for the country) reasons. that right there is the first step to plain and simple wealth redistribution. The next step is to increase welfare programs. The next is "from each according to their ability to each according to their need". you don't think that taxing wealth (savings) is wealth redistribution? please explain. I don't understand son. you call me dear boy, I'll call you son. (because if I say "motherfucker" you'll scream PA) (edit to fix cheesetitted quote)-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #277 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. so you just don't want people to inherit their relative's wealth? That would be a massive inheritance tax you're wanting (double taxation). And could be a way out of poverty for some. so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #278 April 13, 2010 Quote I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. Interesting. You're okay with people having lots of money if they earn it by honestly working, but object to people just given it for doing nothing. Yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. So it's a quantity thing? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #279 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuote"from each according to their ability to each according to their need". Another silly argument. Do try harder, dear boy. Another accurate argument, more like. If that's not what you're advocating then do please elucidate, dear boy.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #280 April 13, 2010 Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work But enough about welfare checks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #281 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work But enough about welfare checks. and you're ok with massive welfare checks to the already rich stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #282 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. Interesting. You're okay with people having lots of money if they earn it by honestly working, but object to people just given it for doing nothing. Yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. So it's a quantity thing? this isn't honest work - this is pure gambling... Quote In 2009, the worst economic year for working people since the Great Depression, the top 25 hedge fund managers walked off with an average of $1 billion each. With the money those 25 people “earned,” we could have hired 658,000 entry level teachers. (They make about $38,000 a year, including benefits.) Those educators could have brought along over 13 million young people, assuming a class size of 20. That’s some value. Apparently the 25 hedge managers did something that is even more valued in our society. But how valuable was it, really? To assess that, we need to answer a few basic questions: 1. What do hedge managers do? They run funds into which very rich people put money to make even more money. Hedge fund managers move the money around in very risky ways to get the most enormous yields possible. (Wealthy investors believe they are entitled to double digit and even triple digit returns.) Because hedge funds are considered playthings for the rich, who presumably are fully aware of all the risks, they are exempt from most financial regulations. http://www.alternet.org/economy/146402/the_preposterous_reality%3A_25_hedge_fund_managers_are_worth_680%2C000_teachers_%28who_teach_13_million_students%29stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #283 April 13, 2010 Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interesting. You're okay with people having lots of money if they earn it by honestly working, but object to people just given it for doing nothing. Yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. So it's a quantity thing? Kallend PLEASE PLEASE respond to this!!!!Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #284 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interesting. You're okay with people having lots of money if they earn it by honestly working, but object to people just given it for doing nothing. Yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. So it's a quantity thing? Kallend PLEASE PLEASE respond to this!!!! people aren't given 'large sums of money' for being unemployed (unless you're a mooching banker)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #285 April 13, 2010 Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work what hte hell is it with you and the winking... If I make a shit-ton of money, and decide to will it to my children upon my death, then I expect that they would live off of it or extend their lifestyle, or save it, for the rest of their lives. Yes. If I leave them a business with employees, It has to be run by someone. I'd expect them to run it, or sell it. Niether of those I'd consider mooching. Now, if I made a shit ton of money and built a large business and it paid dividends to my children for the rest of their lives, I'd not want them to make that their entire life. (just spending their earnings) But would prefer they did something good with that money. But it's theirs to give away, not the governments to take.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #286 April 13, 2010 Quotewhat hte hell is it with you and the winking... He thinks he's clever.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #287 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuote When the top 1% owns 42.2% of the financial wealth of the USA, the top 20% owns 93% of the wealth of the USA, leaving the remaining 80% with just 7% of the financial wealth (2007 data) it seems to me that the "rich" are getting off pretty lightly John of course it does to you because of your simple belief that they didn't EARN it Did the folks running Washington Mutual EARN their money? http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/04/senate_investigation_fraud_pai.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,009 #288 April 13, 2010 >Did the folks running Washington Mutual EARN their money? Yes. They got a good education, worked hard at their first jobs, negotiated a good employment offer from WaMu, and did what they thought their bosses wanted. They also screwed up royally, perhaps criminally. If it was just a screwup that cost WaMu money I'd expect them to be fired. If they broke the law I'd expect them to go to jail. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #289 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work what hte hell is it with you and the winking... If I make a shit-ton of money, and decide to will it to my children upon my death, then I expect that they would live off of it or extend their lifestyle, or save it, for the rest of their lives. Yes. If I leave them a business with employees, It has to be run by someone. I'd expect them to run it, or sell it. Niether of those I'd consider mooching. Now, if I made a shit ton of money and built a large business and it paid dividends to my children for the rest of their lives, I'd not want them to make that their entire life. (just spending their earnings) But would prefer they did something good with that money. But it's theirs to give away, not the governments to take. but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy. and there's no problem with the government increasing inheritance tax to a decent level - perhaps even pay off that deficit stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #290 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work what hte hell is it with you and the winking... If I make a shit-ton of money, and decide to will it to my children upon my death, then I expect that they would live off of it or extend their lifestyle, or save it, for the rest of their lives. Yes. If I leave them a business with employees, It has to be run by someone. I'd expect them to run it, or sell it. Niether of those I'd consider mooching. Now, if I made a shit ton of money and built a large business and it paid dividends to my children for the rest of their lives, I'd not want them to make that their entire life. (just spending their earnings) But would prefer they did something good with that money. But it's theirs to give away, not the governments to take. but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy. and there's no problem with the government increasing inheritance tax to a decent level - perhaps even pay off that deficit Spoken like a man who has nothing to pass on to his heirs.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #291 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote so you're happy with letting people mooch off an unearned inheritance for the rest of their lives while others do the work what hte hell is it with you and the winking... If I make a shit-ton of money, and decide to will it to my children upon my death, then I expect that they would live off of it or extend their lifestyle, or save it, for the rest of their lives. Yes. If I leave them a business with employees, It has to be run by someone. I'd expect them to run it, or sell it. Niether of those I'd consider mooching. Now, if I made a shit ton of money and built a large business and it paid dividends to my children for the rest of their lives, I'd not want them to make that their entire life. (just spending their earnings) But would prefer they did something good with that money. But it's theirs to give away, not the governments to take. but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy. and there's no problem with the government increasing inheritance tax to a decent level - perhaps even pay off that deficit Spoken like a man who has nothing to pass on to his heirs. they already have my good looks and charm stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #292 April 13, 2010 Quote but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy. and there's no problem with the government increasing inheritance tax to a decent level - perhaps even pay off that deficit bequeathing property to family is not running a modern economy. Your comparison is moot. So you'd rather the government take a big chunk of it, and give it to welfare recipients?-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #293 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy. and there's no problem with the government increasing inheritance tax to a decent level - perhaps even pay off that deficit bequeathing property to family is not running a modern economy. Your comparison is moot. So you'd rather the government take a big chunk of it, and give it to welfare recipients? i'd rather they use it to pay off the deficit (don't you)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #294 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm not surprised there's a large percentage, but the figure is a little higher than I expected. What's more telling is the amount of people who instantly jump in to defend the practice. Some of them, if not all, will continue further and bitch that they don't get more. Of course they aren't willing to give any themselves. They'll just insist that other's pay more in taxes. See... liberals equate supporting government handouts to actually caring. Ask one of them how many checks they've written or hours they've spent at a food kitchen. Voting for the wealthy to pay more in taxes helps them sleep better. Sad really. I'm a liberal and I'm one of the people paying more in taxes - a lot more, and I'm willing to pay more if the objective is good enough. Sad thing is that there is such a disparity in income between the bankers who brought us this lovely RECESSION and still walked away with $Millions in bonuses, and the poor SOB's who lost their jobs on account of the recession and have to rely on taxpayer handouts.. d don't you mean all of the people that overspent and got greedy (including the little guys that took loans they could not pay) not just the bankers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #295 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'm not surprised there's a large percentage, but the figure is a little higher than I expected. What's more telling is the amount of people who instantly jump in to defend the practice. Some of them, if not all, will continue further and bitch that they don't get more. Of course they aren't willing to give any themselves. They'll just insist that other's pay more in taxes. See... liberals equate supporting government handouts to actually caring. Ask one of them how many checks they've written or hours they've spent at a food kitchen. Voting for the wealthy to pay more in taxes helps them sleep better. Sad really. I'm a liberal and I'm one of the people paying more in taxes - a lot more, and I'm willing to pay more if the objective is good enough. Sad thing is that there is such a disparity in income between the bankers who brought us this lovely RECESSION and still walked away with $Millions in bonuses, and the poor SOB's who lost their jobs on account of the recession and have to rely on taxpayer handouts.. d don't you mean all of the people that overspent and got greedy (including the little guys that took loans they could not pay) not just the bankers? people took out loans in good faith - it is up to the bankers to get the money supply right. they didn't and much too much got created. the bankers fucked up and they got bailed out.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #296 April 13, 2010 Quote but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy Interesting. You object to unearned gifts of lots of money to people yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. So it's a quantity thing? Most lottery winners earn their big payoff by playing for years. Very few if any hit the big jackpot on their first play. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #297 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuote Those few who pay the taxes to support everyone else will no longer have an incentive to work hard and prosper. I doubt that many people making over, say, $100k/year would change places with an unemployed/homeless/disabled/indigent person just because they didn't want to work hard. I for sure wouldn't. If taxing the rich gets much worse a homeless person on welfare might actually have a higher bring home pay. already the ones making less than 25k a year are worse off than those on welfare when you add in health care, housing and food stamps. how much longer before the handouts are better than a 50k a year job? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #298 April 13, 2010 Quote Quote but to them it's an unearned gift. bit like winning the lottery. not a good way to run a modern economy Interesting. You object to unearned gifts of lots of money to people yet support government programs that give people money for doing nothing. you talking about the military again stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #299 April 13, 2010 Quote people took out loans in good faith - it is up to the bankers to get the money supply right. they didn't and much too much got created. the bankers fucked up and they got bailed out. of course... It's not anyone's fault they didn't do elementary school math on their income and expenses (my first grader is learning greater-than and less-than). It's the banker's fault. what?? BOTH parties are at fault. to deny consumer fault is ignorance.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #300 April 13, 2010 QuoteQuote people took out loans in good faith - it is up to the bankers to get the money supply right. they didn't and much too much got created. the bankers fucked up and they got bailed out. of course... It's not anyone's fault they didn't do elementary school math on their income and expenses (my first grader is learning greater-than and less-than). It's the banker's fault. what?? BOTH parties are at fault. to deny consumer fault is ignorance. it's the bankers job to get the money supply right. they didn't so it's no-ones fault but theirs. you blaming the victims is silly.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
