Morality of Wealth Redistribution

[Ernie S.]

YOU prefer not to use reason, logic or history, you like most right wing conservatives (BLUE DOGS) go on 'feelings' and rhetoric of pulling ones self up by his bootstraps. Ever actually try it? Why can't many do it in China, Mexico, India, etc? Just lazy huh?

actually China just did it and it elimiated 40% of the world's poverty. Do you understand now?

REALLY? SO GOV'T POLICY and THEIR INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DIDN'T DO IT, THE LAZY BASTARDS JUST DECIDED TO WORK ALL OF A SUDDEN? LOL

Government got out of the way. Exactly what would spur our economy.

 

[Ernie S.]

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed.

dear, our Founders based the country on the conservative principle of freedom. THe concept was just applied in China and 40% of the world's poverty was instantly eliminated. Is that bigotry, hatred and greed to a liberal? See why we are positive that liberalism is based on pure ignorance?

Yes, China is free and NOT ran by commies. That's why conservatives LOVE China soooo much

My GOD you couldn't be any stupider.

 

[Ernie S.]

dear, our Founders based the country on the conservative principle of freedom. THe concept was just applied in China and 40% of the world's poverty was instantly eliminated. Is that bigotry, hatred and greed to a liberal? See why we are positive that liberalism is based on pure ignorance?

Yes, China is free and NOT ran by commies. That's why conservatives LOVE China soooo much

dear, China is rapidly switching to capitalism not communism. Communist intervention slowly starved 60 million! Where are you confused?

all over.

 

[dnsmith35]

I do not accept Ayn Rand's ideas, nor am I a libertarian

HORSESHIT!

Yep, you just stuck your nose up a horse's ass and he shit. Fortunately I belong to the group of blue dog democrats who want the country to succeed such that it provides the most prosperity possible to the most people.

You in your thoughtless in ability to think, support every wild ass fanatic left wing extremist known to mankind whether it destroys the fabric of out country or endangers our economic system. You want to drain every dollar you can squeeze out of the economy without regard to how destructive that concept is.

" I belong to the group of blue dog democrats who want the country to succeed such that it provides the most prosperity possible to the most people. "

BOY DID I CALL THAT. Sorry NO ONE with a functioning brain calls Blue Dogs liberals!

Wrong answer! What we are not called is LEFT WING EXTREMISTS LIKE YOU YELLOW DOGS. We understand that some times people other than you extremist ass holes have the right answer. In fact, that is more often than not. Get a brain, learn how to read reality, think for yourself, and stop parroting the leftwing extremist propaganda.

 

[dnsmith35]

I personally prefer to stay away from political rhetoric, even if their is some fabric of truth in it; because, most political rhetoric is propaganda. It doesn't matter from which side of the aisle it comes from. The talking heads and the leaders of both extremist sides love to throw out rhetoric, and within that slim fabric of truth are hidden insidious lies. As far as I am concerned, if you are extremist, you are below pond scum.

YOU prefer not to use reason, logic or history,

Unlike you, I only use reason, logic and history instead of the propaganda you pull off of radical web sites.

you like most right wing conservatives (BLUE DOGS) go on 'feelings' and rhetoric of pulling ones self up by his bootstraps. Ever actually try it? Why can't many do it in China, Mexico, India, etc? Just lazy huh?

One reason the 3rd world workers can't do it comes from their being held down with socialist concepts and too much government control which does not allow it.

Yes, contrary to you, I do have feelings, and being a liberal without borders I believe in the humanity of man all over the world, not just the US where even our least wealthy people live better than most of the 3rd world (with the minor exceptions of some homeless people who are mostly disabled, mentally or physically) It behooves us to start with that small minority in the US and they help those equally poor all over the world before doing more for our "relative poor" in the US.

 

[bripat9643]

There is a such thing as being too rich for Democracy so at some point we came up with cutting the mega rich's fortunes in half upon their death's. That way their kids still get half a fortune and the government/people get their half.

Article: How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy? | OpEdNews

But the rich have fought back and they got rid of the death tax. I don't know where it stands now but with our debt we could use half of Bill Gates fortune when he dies.

Or that guy who owns the Clippers. We should get half of the $2 billion he got from the sale of the Clippers. And he probably already paid $1 billion in taxes so his kids can have half a billion the state gets the rest.

Please don't cry for them. They'll be just fine. And if they don't pay then the poor and middle class have to pay. That's not right, fair and it doesn't work.

What right do you have to Bill Gates' money?

Why didn't he make his money in Africa or China? Oh right, he made it BECAUSE he was born in the USA AND because of the SOCIETY THE US PROVIDED OVER 200+ YEARS!

"The society the U.S. provided?" Government does not create society, moron. Charging for the benefits of society would be like charging for the benefit of the English language. Government didn't create it, and no one owes government a thing for its existence. The same goes for "society."

That has to be one of the top 10 lamest arguments ever posted in this forum.

 

[bripat9643]

A libertarian who wants to control other nations. I'm shocked, no really I am

You didn't answer the question, nimrod.

Oh I think MANY dictators are bad guys, weird how Reagan supported Saddam BEFORE we decided he was 'bad' though. How many other nations are you libertarians going to want to overthrow BECAUSE they are bad guys?

The issue wasn't whether he was a bad guy. The issue was whether he was a threat to the Western World, and he definitely was. He was as much of a threat as Adolph Hitler was.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

actually China just did it and it elimiated 40% of the world's poverty. Do you understand now?

REALLY? SO GOV'T POLICY and THEIR INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DIDN'T DO IT, THE LAZY BASTARDS JUST DECIDED TO WORK ALL OF A SUDDEN? LOL

Government got out of the way. Exactly what would spur our economy.

yes it started by accident when a frustrated and disloyal local official let people grow their own food to end the constant starvation, and it grew from there with more and more freedom from libcommie govt.

Our treasonous libs cant understand it and still push for more and more control of the
economy.

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[dnsmith35]

REALLY? SO GOV'T POLICY and THEIR INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DIDN'T DO IT, THE LAZY BASTARDS JUST DECIDED TO WORK ALL OF A SUDDEN? LOL

Government got out of the way. Exactly what would spur our economy.

yes it started by accident when a frustrated and disloyal local official let people grow their own food to end the constant starvation, and it grew from there with more and more freedom from libcommie govt.

Our treasonous libs cant understand it and still push for more and more control of the
economy.

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread." - Thomas Jefferson

There has never been a successful socialist experiment. There have been many successful capitalist economic systems, all of which are based on private enterprise making the primary decisions about production, distribution, and prices. All capitalist systems have various social programs to help the less fortunate, and all produce more prosperity to spread around among all of the people.

Yes, there is a disparity of income, but, the fact is our system is better for most people than a socialist system where only a token few commissars have any wealth and every one is poor.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes, there is a disparity of income, but,

you sound almost apologetic about it?? The creative geniuses like Gates Jobs Brin Musk are the ones who push evolution further. If we limited them to a common income why would they bother. Why provide disincentives for the creative genius from whom we all benefit in the end?


Imagine the state of evolution if no animal was allowed to be superior for fear of making the other's feel inferior!

 

[dblack]

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, there is a disparity of income, but,

you sound almost apologetic about it?? The creative geniuses like Gates Jobs Brin Musk are the ones who push evolution further. If we limited them to a common income why would they bother. Why provide disincentives for the creative genius from whom we all benefit in the end?


Imagine the state of evolution if no animal was allowed to be superior for fear of making the other's feel inferior!

Good post. Also, what the class envy/resentment crowd never wants to look at is how many people also prospered directly or indirectly because of the rich man's climb to wealth? He couldn't have accomplished such great financial success without benefitting many others along the way. And even now, how many benefit from the markets the rich provide for expensive things? How many benefit from the massive taxes the rich pay even if they do manage to shelter income and pay at a smaller percentage than somebody else? How many have benefitted from the scholarship funds and hospital wings and museum exhibits and other philanthropy almost all the rich engage in? And the direct and indirect benefits often go on in a ripple effect for generations, long after the rich man has passed on.

The only thing that bugs me about the rich is that I'm not one of them, but I sure don't think that is their fault.

 

[Abishai100]

We know of the folk tale of Robin Hood, the incredible archer from Old England who stole from the rich and gave to the poor and became a hero in the hearts and minds of the masses who yearned for wealth redistribution.

When we make economics contracts as they relate to the governance logistics of a society, we can build competitive markets. The game that we play implicitly invites 'players' to agree that the reward for winning the game could deservedly go only to the winner.

Unfortunately, with many economics theories regarding Wall Street games, problematic policies regarding trickle-down-economics and over-investing tend to favor the wealthy or give undue hand-outs to the under-privileged.

In order for institutions such as Wall Street to be praised favorably, we need to come up with better 'fight songs' for economic competition and labor.

This is why Robin Hood is such a timelessly appealing figure. Wealth redistribution is so complex that we are comforted by stories of fortune-reinvention heroes.



Robin Hood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Youch]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

It is immoral, of course. Such is the obvious flaw of liberalism.

 

[dnsmith35]

Yes, there is a disparity of income, but,

you sound almost apologetic about it?? The creative geniuses like Gates Jobs Brin Musk are the ones who push evolution further. If we limited them to a common income why would they bother. Why provide disincentives for the creative genius from whom we all benefit in the end?


Imagine the state of evolution if no animal was allowed to be superior for fear of making the other's feel inferior!

If you believe I was being apologetic, you missed my point. I was trying to make the individual understand that however HE views our socio-economic system, he is damned lucky we have a system which produces such a wide range of prosperity as we have. I do believe that motivation, incentive, ambition et al are important, and those who make our economy progress deserve higher incomes.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes, there is a disparity of income, but,

you sound almost apologetic about it?? The creative geniuses like Gates Jobs Brin Musk are the ones who push evolution further. If we limited them to a common income why would they bother. Why provide disincentives for the creative genius from whom we all benefit in the end?


Imagine the state of evolution if no animal was allowed to be superior for fear of making the other's feel inferior!

If you believe I was being apologetic, you missed my point. I was trying to make the individual understand that however HE views our socio-economic system, he is damned lucky we have a system which produces such a wide range of prosperity as we have. I do believe that motivation, incentive, ambition et al are important, and those who make our economy progress deserve higher incomes.

good so next time there is no need to say, "Yes, it produces inequality, but". You might say it produces massive inequality when heroic figures like Gates Brin Jobs Musk make huge huge contributions to society that average people can only dream about.

Sports produces massive inequality too since some can play them far better than others. Yet the best sports figures are our heros while the the best capitalists are not despite their far more important contributions. This is due to pure liberal ignorance and the liberal success at brainwashing average folks like dumbto3.

 

[dnsmith35]

you sound almost apologetic about it?? The creative geniuses like Gates Jobs Brin Musk are the ones who push evolution further. If we limited them to a common income why would they bother. Why provide disincentives for the creative genius from whom we all benefit in the end?


Imagine the state of evolution if no animal was allowed to be superior for fear of making the other's feel inferior!

If you believe I was being apologetic, you missed my point. I was trying to make the individual understand that however HE views our socio-economic system, he is damned lucky we have a system which produces such a wide range of prosperity as we have. I do believe that motivation, incentive, ambition et al are important, and those who make our economy progress deserve higher incomes.

good so next time there is no need to say, "Yes, it produces inequality, but". You might say it produces massive inequality when heroic figures like Gates Brin Jobs Musk make huge huge contributions to society that average people can only dream about.

Sports produces massive inequality too since some can play them far better than others. Yet the best sports figures are our heros while the the best capitalists are not despite their far more important contributions. This is due to pure liberal ignorance and the liberal success at brainwashing average folks like dumbto3.

At 78 I am a little set in the way I talk and write.

 

[Dad2three]

actually China just did it and it elimiated 40% of the world's poverty. Do you understand now?

REALLY? SO GOV'T POLICY and THEIR INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DIDN'T DO IT, THE LAZY BASTARDS JUST DECIDED TO WORK ALL OF A SUDDEN? LOL

Government got out of the way. Exactly what would spur our economy.

Sure, it wasn't conservatives race to the bottom and shipping US jobs there

Distortions, myths and fairy tales, the ONLY thing conservatives/libertarians EVER have

 

[Dad2three]

I personally prefer to stay away from political rhetoric, even if their is some fabric of truth in it; because, most political rhetoric is propaganda. It doesn't matter from which side of the aisle it comes from. The talking heads and the leaders of both extremist sides love to throw out rhetoric, and within that slim fabric of truth are hidden insidious lies. As far as I am concerned, if you are extremist, you are below pond scum.

YOU prefer not to use reason, logic or history,

Unlike you, I only use reason, logic and history instead of the propaganda you pull off of radical web sites.

you like most right wing conservatives (BLUE DOGS) go on 'feelings' and rhetoric of pulling ones self up by his bootstraps. Ever actually try it? Why can't many do it in China, Mexico, India, etc? Just lazy huh?

One reason the 3rd world workers can't do it comes from their being held down with socialist concepts and too much government control which does not allow it.

Yes, contrary to you, I do have feelings, and being a liberal without borders I believe in the humanity of man all over the world, not just the US where even our least wealthy people live better than most of the 3rd world (with the minor exceptions of some homeless people who are mostly disabled, mentally or physically) It behooves us to start with that small minority in the US and they help those equally poor all over the world before doing more for our "relative poor" in the US.

You know conservative economics is a failure when they have to keep reminding us how much better our poor is than the poor in 3rd world countries!



Libertarianism is one of those things that sounds good when you read about it in high school, or maybe your first year of college. But once you are out in the real world for say, five, or even six entire minutes, you quickly realize it's a narcissistic, child-like ideology that doesn't actually work and has no basis in reality

 

[Dad2three]

What right do you have to Bill Gates' money?

Why didn't he make his money in Africa or China? Oh right, he made it BECAUSE he was born in the USA AND because of the SOCIETY THE US PROVIDED OVER 200+ YEARS!

"The society the U.S. provided?" Government does not create society, moron. Charging for the benefits of society would be like charging for the benefit of the English language. Government didn't create it, and no one owes government a thing for its existence. The same goes for "society."

That has to be one of the top 10 lamest arguments ever posted in this forum.

Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father, American diplomat, statesman, and scientist; letter to Robert Morris, December 25, 1783:

"All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."