Morality of Wealth Redistribution

[DiamondDave]

Oh... and velcro shoes

velcro shoes - Google Search

 

[newpolitics]

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?

We redistribute our wealth into politicians pockets all the time, into lobbyists pockets, into corporate band accounts and the CEO's who draw from them... why the FUCK aren't you complaining about that, since it is much more pertinent in ruining our democracy? I hate this false, bitchy ass complaint about 're-distribution' of wealth. The REASON it is morally RIGHT to re-distribute is because many of the rich people got that way by being immoral, in someway exploiting the masses in order to gain their fortune, whether knowingly or not. They didn't just get rich JUST because they worked harder, although hard work is very important. They relied, unknowingly, on differential advantages. Whether they are exploiting poor workers in another country who are paid horribly in order to make the product their company designs... Being white and male affords helps too, and you think that's bullshit, go fuck yourself and wake up to the reality that is our humanity. People hate if it helps them get ahead or cut out the competition. I think racism and sexism are leveraged to cut out any competition to allow a fewer more privileged group of people access to scarce resources. Well, it's taken a lot for minorities and woman to cut through that barrier, and its not completely down, so stop ACTING like the playing field is level because ITS NOT. If you believe otherwise, then you just want to be rich too, and that makes you a jackass. We don't NEED to be rich to be happy. In fact, it has nothing to do with happiness. What is everyone's obsession with needing to be rich? People who talk about this immorality are just selfish people who don't want to help anyone but themselves, ironically.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't despise Wal-mart. They have found a way to thrive and prosper in a very business unfriendly environment and I say power to them. I shop there infrequently, however. And I've never worked for them but I have family members who have (retired school teachers) and they did not find it a bad experience even though they didn't stay all that long. I hope to leave something for my kids too that will increase their ability to do more with their lives that otherwise might not be possible.

But instead of focusing on Wal-Mart as the bad guy, how about focusing on a government who makes a Wal-mart possible and/or even necessary? How about demanding a government that will stop crushing business spirit and initiative and will rather remove onerous tax and regulation policies and provide incentives for more jobs to be created here? More products to be manufactured here?

Labor is a commodity like anything else. And it is worth more the less there is of it. Work to restore full employment in this country and Wal-mart, along with everybody else, will be forced to raise wages and improve benefits to attract and keep good people. Those that continue to work in low paying 'drudge' jobs will be those that simply aren't capable or willing to do anything else. But there needs to be a place for them too.

We have a government that seems gung ho to keep American business oppressed and American labor unemployed and encourages cheaper products made by cheaper labor overseas. Fix that, and you fix all of it.

 

[CountofTuscany]

By looting the other half?

the result would be an economic catastrophe so vast that sufficient words to describe it don't exist.

Yeah, it works so much better when only a few loot the rest.

What do you call it when the Walmart family makes $millions each off of the labor of people they pay so little they qualify for foodstamps?

My family despises Wallyworld and we don't shop there. Their corporate philosophy is totally counter to what we believe in. They are responsible in large part for the economic decline of this country. They want to sell products to the masses so cheaply that the only way a company can produce them cheap enough is to go overseas (mainly China) which in turn drives US companies out of business.

Anyone who shops at Wallyworld is contributing to that. People who work there do it of their own free will. Oftentimes it is the only job to be had, which is sad. But those who shop there are contributing to the problem.

But keeping it real, so does every other major retailer. Sears, Target, K Mart, no matter where you go. Look at the label of almost everything you buy, no matter where you buy it from and you'll see it comes from Asia.

I'd love to buy American again. But unless it becomes affordable to live in America on blue collar wages again, that isn't going to happen.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wal-Mart dominates by negotiating for special subsidies and privilege from local government.

Nonsense - utter bullshit.

This is neither the fault of the hourly employees who work for Wal-Mart, nor the people who shop there. It's the fault of government officials who sell out equal protection for money.

Any incentives, such as tax deferments offered by localities are subject to review by any agency plus the public. If your city council offers Walmart a years deferential in hopes of attracting jobs and ongoing tax revenue, that's a smart move. If you don't agree, vote the council out. Welcome to a free country. If you don't like free countries, move to California.

 

[Againsheila]

Those workers were FORCED to work there?? You were FORCED to shop there? Those workers could not apply anywhere else??

People are free to go for their own success or failure, whether you like their legal business practices or not

Yes, many of those workers were "forced" to work there through lack of opportunities elsewhere. Yes, I am "forced" to shop there as they are the only store I can find which carries velcro fasten shoes for my adult autistic son.

BTW, the Walmart family INHERITED their wealth. Sam Walton, the man who built up the business on the practice of "made in America" died and I'll bet he's turning over in his grave at what his children have done to the business.

Yeah, the Walmart family is free to do pretty much what they want. Which is why they've gone to court for LOCKING their employees in at night. You really ought to look up their "business practices".

If I had another way to get those velcro shoes, I wouldn't set foot inside a Walmart store the rest of my life.

Wrong

What forced them not to move or work at McDonalds or start a home cleaning service or anything else??

If you don't like that they got an inheritance passed down in the family from others who put in effort.. or that they expanded it even more.. too bad.. too sad... boo freaking hoo

You're angry and don't like it and instead of using your choice, you wish to punish them in other ways thru big mommy government...

Don't like them, don't shop or work there.... simple as that

No it's not that simple. There aren't enough jobs out there. The last time I went looking for a job, when my husband was unemployed, it took me a YEAR. Never before had it ever taken me that long to find a job. I used to think I could get one in a couple of days, I used to be able to but that option isn't out there today. Why? Most of our jobs have been sent overseas and those that remain are being filled by immigrants, both legal and illegal. They don't want Americans. That's why if you get a job at Walmart you HAVE to take it. I'm sure you would rather they be homeless and unemployed but most people WANT to provide for themselves even though our economy and society today make it impossible for many.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No it's not that simple. There aren't enough jobs out there.

Thanks Obama - Heck of a job, Barry...

The last time I went looking for a job, when my husband was unemployed, it took me a YEAR.

Walmart getting picky and asking for a high school diploma, or something?

Never before had it ever taken me that long to find a job.

Thank those who voted for hopey changey....

Why? Most of our jobs have been sent overseas and those that remain are being filled by immigrants, both legal and illegal.

So you are only qualified to pull a lever on a widget making machine?

They don't want Americans.

Who is "they?"

 

[dblack]

Wal-Mart dominates by negotiating for special subsidies and privilege from local government.

Nonsense - utter bullshit.

Good answer, good answer!

Are you saying Wal-Mart doesn't negotiate for these perks? Or that it doesn't give them an advantage over local competitors who don't get them?

Or are you just saying 'bullshit'?

Any incentives, such as tax deferments offered by localities are subject to review by any agency plus the public. If your city council offers Walmart a years deferential in hopes of attracting jobs and ongoing tax revenue, that's a smart move. If you don't agree, vote the council out. Welcome to a free country. If you don't like free countries, move to California.

Hmm.... I guess it's a 'smart move' if your goal is to fuck over mom and pop to bring in a few more tax dollars. Our government isn't designed to run on pure majority rule. It's constitutionally constrained to prevent the majority from screwing over the minority willy-niily.

 

[Againsheila]

No it's not that simple. There aren't enough jobs out there.

Thanks Obama - Heck of a job, Barry...

The last time I went looking for a job, when my husband was unemployed, it took me a YEAR.

Walmart getting picky and asking for a high school diploma, or something?



Thank those who voted for hopey changey....

Why? Most of our jobs have been sent overseas and those that remain are being filled by immigrants, both legal and illegal.

So you are only qualified to pull a lever on a widget making machine?

They don't want Americans.

Who is "they?"

Actually, it was under Bush that my husband was laid off. It was under Bush that it took me a year to find a job, and it was under Bush that that job was sent to India.

Obama hasn't been a big help, but he didn't ruin out country all by himself.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Good answer, good answer!

Are you saying Wal-Mart doesn't negotiate for these perks? Or that it doesn't give them an advantage over local competitors who don't get them?

Or are you just saying 'bullshit'?

I'm saying that your claim is complete bullshit.

When an business of significance files a intent, cities and counties very well may seek to offer enticements to create the tax and employment opportunities in their area.

You claimed that Walmart gets "special subsidies;" show me these. Show me where this happens. Yes, California EDD pays a portion of wages for hard to place or handicapped workers - it's a subsidy, but nothing special about it. Walmart is no more eligible than any other business.

Hmm.... I guess it's a 'smart move' if your goal is to fuck over mom and pop to bring in a few more tax dollars.

The myth of the "mom and pop." Most smaller stores couldn't compete against Target, KMart or Sears. You demand that consumers pay higher prices, for what? To assuage some social conscience MSNBC fabricates for you?

Again, your premise is bullishit - a fabrication.

Our government isn't designed to run on pure majority rule.

And the relevance of that is? You think the government should outlaw Walmart, because Jon Stewart told you they were bad?

 

[Againsheila]

Think about this my friend...

What if half the people in the United States suddenly doubled their net worth?

By looting the other half?

the result would be an economic catastrophe so vast that sufficient words to describe it don't exist.

Exactly. Chris got one thing right and only one thing that I've seen so far when he said 48% don't pay tax. I'm assuming he meant wage earners because that is the group that figure applies to and he's a tad low on the percentage but close.

So we have half of working Americans paying little or no federal income tax and that leaves the other half to carry all the load. But his ilk wants the half that carries all the load to carry a bigger load.

I say reduce the load on the half currently carrying it because that is the group that is furnishing jobs to the bottom half. Lower business taxes, eliminate all regulation we don't absolutely have to have, allow industries to do their job, and that will free up a lot more resources and capital to encourage new hiring and also increase wages and benefits that would be advisable when more people are competing for good people.

I would do it by going to a flat tax across the board so that everybody is paying the same percentage at whatever level of income. A reasonable flat exemption would keep from taking food out of the mouths of the truly working poor, but otherwise everybody, richer and less rich would be paying something into the system and also suffering the same consequences of whatever tax policies are imposed by our fearless leaders. Redistribution of wealth would happen via the free market which is the only way it can happen without doing more harm than good.

No more would half the country have incentive to keep electing incompetent legislators just because they keep the gravy train going but everybody, rich and less rich, would have more incentive to elect the best people we can get. And if we remove the Federal government's ability to use the people's money for any kind of benefit to any special group, we have solved almost all of the corruption and graft associated with 'redistribution of wealth.'

Our economy is on a bell curve, with the majority of it's wealth in the top 1%, who's income has gone up more than 150% since the 70's, and you want the people who are in poverty paying taxes? You can't get blood out of a turnip.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, it was under Bush that my husband was laid off.

Generally jobs were plentiful under Bush.

It was under Bush that it took me a year to find a job, and it was under Bush that that job was sent to India.

You DO realize that manufacturing jobs that offshore do so because of regulation - particularly environmental regulation, not because of labor cost.

Who is it that is behind onerous regulation again? Oh yeah, the fascist democrats and the enviro-wacko cadre therein.

Obama hasn't been a big help, but he didn't ruin out country all by himself.

Oh, you're right about that. Harry, Nancy and particularly Algore, have a huge part in it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Actually, it was under Bush that my husband was laid off.

Generally jobs were plentiful under Bush.

It was under Bush that it took me a year to find a job, and it was under Bush that that job was sent to India.

You DO realize that manufacturing jobs that offshore do so because of regulation - particularly environmental regulation, not because of labor cost.

Who is it that is behind onerous regulation again? Oh yeah, the fascist democrats and the enviro-wacko cadre therein.

Obama hasn't been a big help, but he didn't ruin out country all by himself.

Oh, you're right about that. Harry, Nancy and particularly Algore, have a huge part in it.

Bush has to take his lumps too though. He offered a social entitlement concept, an energy policy, an environmental policy, and an immigration policy that only a leftist socialist could love. And all of that played a part in some of the problems we're seeing now. He and the GOP Congress could have done the nation a great service by making the very good 2003 tax policy permanent when they had the chance, but they didn't.

Yes, Obama has done nothing to help any of the problems and has exacerbated most, but if we are brutally honest, we need a whole new perspective in Washington.

 

[editec]

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’s just another government ploy to pull the wool over the sheep’s eyes and deflect the truth. The government has a 30 year plan to change the face of America.

1. Strip Americans from their wealth.

2. Take America’s guns away.

3. Put America on her knees so, what they offer us looks good.

4. Become a “One World Government” “One World Order”, where the U.N. is the ruler of all lands and the Constitution is a dead useless piece of paper.

What a delusional post.

Yet that is PRECISELY where we are headed.

Odd, that it takes a DELUSIONAL THINKER to notice the bleeding obvious isn't it?

Howl on Wolf.

 

[dblack]

You claimed that Walmart gets "special subsidies;" show me these. Show me where this happens.

The Damage of Walmart - The Northern Iowan - University of Northern Iowa

A simple google search will net you a long list of similar articles documenting the practice. No one really denies that this goes on. Wal-Mart doesn't deny it. The cities and states playing these games don't deny. I can't stop you from denying it, but neither can I take you seriously if you do.

When an business of significance files a intent, cities and counties very well may seek to offer enticements to create the tax and employment opportunities in their area.

Yep. That's the part that's wrong. Cities and counties shouldn't be allowed grant special favors to one business while sticking it to everyone else just because that business has lots of money to throw around.

The myth of the "mom and pop." Most smaller stores couldn't compete against Target, KMart or Sears.

You think it's a 'myth' that if one business gets tax-abatements, free infrastructure support, special carve-out offers from government they'll have an advantage over those who don't?

Again, your premise is bullishit - a fabrication.

Heh.. deny it all you want, but I'm not lying. All this is accepted fact. The question is whether it's the kind of government we want.

Our government isn't designed to run on pure majority rule.

And the relevance of that is?

You don't see the relevance of constitutionally limited government?

 

[Againsheila]

You claimed that Walmart gets "special subsidies;" show me these. Show me where this happens.

The Damage of Walmart - The Northern Iowan - University of Northern Iowa

A simple google search will net you a long list of similar articles documenting the practice. No one really denies that this goes on. Wal-Mart doesn't deny it. The cities and states playing these games don't deny. I can't stop you from denying it, but neither can I take you seriously if you do.

When an business of significance files a intent, cities and counties very well may seek to offer enticements to create the tax and employment opportunities in their area.

Yep. That's the part that's wrong. Cities and counties shouldn't be allowed grant special favors to one business while sticking it to everyone else just because that business has lots of money to throw around.



You think it's a 'myth' that if one business gets tax-abatements, free infrastructure support, special carve-out offers from government they'll have an advantage over those who don't?



Heh.. deny it all you want, but I'm not lying. All this is accepted fact. The question is whether it's the kind of government we want.

Our government isn't designed to run on pure majority rule.

And the relevance of that is?

You don't see the relevance of constitutionally limited government?

Isn't it amazing how many people say they don't believe in socialism actually do but only when it comes to the wealthy. Bail outs for the banks. Subsidies for corporations. But of course the workers deserve nothing, not even a living wage.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes, many of those workers were "forced" to work there through lack of opportunities elsewhere. Yes, I am "forced" to shop there as they are the only store I can find which carries velcro fasten shoes for my adult autistic son.

BTW, the Walmart family INHERITED their wealth. Sam Walton, the man who built up the business on the practice of "made in America" died and I'll bet he's turning over in his grave at what his children have done to the business.

Yeah, the Walmart family is free to do pretty much what they want. Which is why they've gone to court for LOCKING their employees in at night. You really ought to look up their "business practices".

If I had another way to get those velcro shoes, I wouldn't set foot inside a Walmart store the rest of my life.

Wrong

What forced them not to move or work at McDonalds or start a home cleaning service or anything else??

If you don't like that they got an inheritance passed down in the family from others who put in effort.. or that they expanded it even more.. too bad.. too sad... boo freaking hoo

You're angry and don't like it and instead of using your choice, you wish to punish them in other ways thru big mommy government...

Don't like them, don't shop or work there.... simple as that

No it's not that simple. There aren't enough jobs out there. The last time I went looking for a job, when my husband was unemployed, it took me a YEAR. Never before had it ever taken me that long to find a job. I used to think I could get one in a couple of days, I used to be able to but that option isn't out there today. Why? Most of our jobs have been sent overseas and those that remain are being filled by immigrants, both legal and illegal. They don't want Americans. That's why if you get a job at Walmart you HAVE to take it. I'm sure you would rather they be homeless and unemployed but most people WANT to provide for themselves even though our economy and society today make it impossible for many.

It is that simple. It's not society's responsibility, nor government's responsibility, for you to find a job for your own earning needs... That is the fatal flaw in your thinking...

You don't HAVE to take squat... you make the free choice to do what you have to do.. whether it be a job at walmart, a graveyard shift job at the quickie mart, scooping poop, or whatever else...

Oh.. and look at why jobs go overseas... make things a little more friendly here in terms of corporate taxation, and things may change

 

[dblack]

Isn't it amazing how many people say they don't believe in socialism actually do but only when it comes to the wealthy. Bail outs for the banks. Subsidies for corporations. But of course the workers deserve nothing, not even a living wage.

If by 'amazing', you mean totally fucking depressing - yeah, I guess. I honestly don't see a dime's worth of difference between modern 'liberals' and 'conservatives'. Both sides are just as excited about ubiquitous government, just as excited about forcing their values on others.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Bush has to take his lumps too though. He offered a social entitlement concept, an energy policy, an environmental policy, and an immigration policy that only a leftist socialist could love.

The ONLY good thing I can say about Bush is that he was better than Obama. I never voted for him and opposed most of his agenda.

And all of that played a part in some of the problems we're seeing now. He and the GOP Congress could have done the nation a great service by making the very good 2003 tax policy permanent when they had the chance, but they didn't.

Good point.

Yes, Obama has done nothing to help any of the problems and has exacerbated most, but if we are brutally honest, we need a whole new perspective in Washington.

That's why I vote Libertarian.

 

[Againsheila]

Wrong

What forced them not to move or work at McDonalds or start a home cleaning service or anything else??

If you don't like that they got an inheritance passed down in the family from others who put in effort.. or that they expanded it even more.. too bad.. too sad... boo freaking hoo

You're angry and don't like it and instead of using your choice, you wish to punish them in other ways thru big mommy government...

Don't like them, don't shop or work there.... simple as that

No it's not that simple. There aren't enough jobs out there. The last time I went looking for a job, when my husband was unemployed, it took me a YEAR. Never before had it ever taken me that long to find a job. I used to think I could get one in a couple of days, I used to be able to but that option isn't out there today. Why? Most of our jobs have been sent overseas and those that remain are being filled by immigrants, both legal and illegal. They don't want Americans. That's why if you get a job at Walmart you HAVE to take it. I'm sure you would rather they be homeless and unemployed but most people WANT to provide for themselves even though our economy and society today make it impossible for many.

It is that simple. It's not society's responsibility, nor government's responsibility, for you to find a job for your own earning needs... That is the fatal flaw in your thinking...

You don't HAVE to take squat... you make the free choice to do what you have to do.. whether it be a job at walmart, a graveyard shift job at the quickie mart, scooping poop, or whatever else...

Oh.. and look at why jobs go overseas... make things a little more friendly here in terms of corporate taxation, and things may change

How 12 Multinational Corporations Avoid Paying Taxes | Economy | AlterNet
How 12 Multinational Corporations Avoid Paying Taxes


U.S. Corporations Not Paying Taxes | WallStNation.com
U.S. Corporations Not Paying Taxes

Jane Devin: Many US Corporations Not Paying Taxes At All


Many US Corporations Not Paying Taxes At All

Corporations not Paying Fair Share | Free Range Longmont

Corporations not Paying Fair Share

and on and on it goes.

Yeah, it's terrible how those corporations are sending jobs overseas because here they aren't paying any taxes at all......