And to that all I can say is, if you do the crime be willing to do the time.
Once someone goes outsides the law, I don't consider them to be a valid point in most arguments regarding distribution of wealth and taxes. They've chosen to live outside the rules that society has put in place and as such aren't entitled to be included.
There are plenty of people out there who made a fortune and did so perfectly in the bounds of our legal system, and I applaud those people for working hard and being rewarded.
What I can't stand is people who want to get a piece of the pie without doing anything, which as far as I can tell, is the cornerstone of socialism.
(Sorry if I'm ranting, I recently had an old friend completely bash and tear apart my life and some friends because he is upset that he is poor. He cries about socialism and equality among everyone, but he isn't willing to lift a finger beyond working a crappy job for the rest of his life. No college education, no motivation, and he gets pissed off when anyone is rewarded for hard work because he feels that since he's poor, he deserves more)
As far as greed is concerned, I always thought that the best way to deal with it is to just put a price tag on human life.
If you fuck people over a certain amount of money, you should be considered a murderer and treated as such.
Wall Street Bailout = socialist?
lol
There are plenty of wealthy people who did not become that way by "fucking people." This might not have been your intention, but it sort of comes off as saying rich = bad.
Wealthier people pay higher percentages of their income as federal income taxes. While I am not sure if it is "fair" I believe it helps lift the burden of those who would struggle with the cost of living and am sure it helps the country. The question though, is whether it is fair to effectively punish those who become more successful.
I'm sure people will come back and say that you are giving back, etc, but I am interested to hear what people have to say, and if people are (possibly) just trying to better their own situations.
If you get rich through your successes you fully deserve to enjoy all of your wealth in whatever way possible.
If you get rich by being a leecher, being a criminal (illegally or business-wise) or on the fruits of other mens labor, then fuck you; I have no problem seeing your wealth disappear. However, I also don't think the government should take it from them - what's the difference between men stealing wealth through force to have it taken again by a stronger force? Well some would say, because the stronger force would redistribute it...but I'd say that there would be personal gain sought in this venture and the cycle of leechers would continue.
Person A has no talent, and owns a coal mine. Person B has tons of talent and runs a coal mine more efficiently and on schedule, but Person A has friends in Washington and doesn't find it fair that Person B makes more money than him. I don't like the precedent of the Government taking things from people with guns, not for any reason.
I realize by taking churchill's explanation of the proposed changes I am setting myself up for disaster but if this is an accurate interpretation this sounds an awful lot like the goings-on in Atlas Shrugged
I would hope after 7 pages I am not the 1st to point this out
inb4 or after pohibaba
You forget that nobody becomes rich solely through their own successes. The system has been set up to allow individuals to move up in the world as a byproduct of their own hard work, sure, but the system is hardly without cost.
Asking those who manage to make it to shoulder some of the cost for future success stories is fair.
Just wanted to give a Big Old FUCK YOU
To anyone in boston, that decided to go out swimming in the christian science pool after obama won.
Fuck, You.
That is all.
Very very few people in American get rich as a "by-product of their hard work".
Capitalism itself rewards mainly those with the ability to manipulate those who do hard work. It's the people at the bottom/lower-middle who tend to work the hardest and yet very few of them "make it".
Success in America has nothing to do with hard work, it's primarily a matter of timing, luck, and ability to manipulate. There's millions of people who "worked hard" all their life, contributing to society and end their lives not even being able to afford to bury themselves. Yet somehow we view these people as social pariahs...no matter how hard they worked they "didn't work hard ENOUGH"...
You guys really think most people with lot's of money "earned" it? Earned it compared to what? Is that junior executive really working 10x harder to justify his salary compared to the people who enable him to have that wealth below him? no, he's not, not even close.
We seriously have some grossly deformed concepts as a society what it means to "Work-hard" and to "Earn" money.
Damn right it's fair to ask those who "made it" to contribute more, because they didn't get there because of "hard-work" they got there through luck.
While I wont say that the super rich didn't earn what they have, even in a small way, I do believe they mostly ride the wave of old money and that succeeding generations are able to put less and less into it. I mean, think about it, after a point, even those who make it on hard work and grit try for investors and that's what usually means the difference between a single store or a national chain.
Honestly, that's all irrelevant, because showing that you can pull that much weight for yourself means you should be able to use as large a percentage of that effort as people who didn't have the strength or the imagination. Cargo isn't pulled by rabbits, it's pulled by oxes.
Obama's victory is definitely historic but his ideas/etc. aren't going to 'change' much. We're still getting one side of the same coin, albeit slightly better.
We're still fighting illegal wars and wreaking havoc on people who've done nothing to us, supporting one country while it destroys another, etc. etc. etc.
The real change/hope/blah blah would have come from Nader but you simply can't win or even get proper coverage if you don't pass through certain filters. In our country you have to appeal to certain constituencies to be 'relevant'.
So yea, I'd say it's great Obama won in the sense that it shows how far we've come in our history but if he was a white guy, he'd obviously lose a lot of his appeal.
I know the flow of discussion has moved past the Healthcare questions a couple pages back, but I've read through Obama's notes on his policy, and this was a pretty good interpretation of the scope of his plan:
http://www.hsinetwork.com/Obama_HSI-...08-21-2008.pdf
For the record, this group did a write up on both proposals and posted the results a couple months ago.
The flaw in your argument is that you're equating innovation and entrepreneurism with "hard-work"...that entrepreneur isn't doing it alone...he's not a single rock in an ocean. There's an entire society helping him, and he's just lucky enough to be in a position to take advantage of that for personal advancement. The people who work for him are working just as hard(if not more so) as him, but because he is the one in charge he's earning a disproportionate amount of wealth relative to what he's contributing. That's ignoring all the people not working for him that helped him get to that point(all the public servants, educators, and other small businesses on which he relies on).
He's just in a position to manipulate as I said previously, it doesn't mean he's actually shouldering more of a burden as you imply. The concept that leaders "deserve" more is the fundamental flaw in the modern notion of capitalism. Leading is a job just like any other, and the people who do it should be doing it because they're good at it, not because it gives them disproportionate amount of benefits.
I have no idea what conversations are taking place, and frankly don't care, and I'm not reading 5 pages to find out either. I'm just throwing out some random comments. First, I don't care what color he is. He was a better choice by far than Geezer McCain and lolPalin.
Secondly, and the best thing about this whole election, HE'S NOT MOTHERFUCKING GEORGE W. BUSH. Thank god that reign of stupidity is OVER. Hey Dubya, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, you piece of shit. You can, however, let it hit you repeatedly in the head. (Not like it would make him any stupider than he already is, but watching a .gif of a door hitting him in the head would provide me with hours of entertainment.)