Whats Wrong with Redistribution of Wealth?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mutatis, Feb 11, 2014.

  1.  
    Did you not suggest there is no need for taxes? My point is of course there is a need.
     
     
    Of course poor kids go to school now, it's free. One doesn't need to pay the school or the gov for their kid...no matter how many...to go to school.
     
    lol walmart is for the poor? Wow!  I'm thinking you don't know what poor is lol.  Thrift shops & food banks are for poor people...walmart is a place that provides a wide range of products. And I've seen all kinds of peeps shopping at wal-mart....none of which I would call poor, I'd call them shopping.
     
    I live in a country where the kid who has leukemia and never paid a cent in tax and has only cost the tax payer via hospital visits pre & post birth still gets the 200k plus in hospital care to treat their cancer, and I believe in that principal.
     
    Sure, call democracy what you want, it's merely semantics. The point is you are not part of the majority...i.e. go back to the woods.
     
    can you please point out some support for any of your claims. There are reasons your idealized view isn't a reality.
     
    My provincial and fed tax costs me just under a grand a month including gov pension contributions, health care tax, and employment insurance...all about the same as my rent (which itself has prop tax "built in"). So 2k a month living here. I would figure about another $300 is retail sales tax.
     
    Imo whether it is a business building my roads, building power plants & infrastructure (Ontario), water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, court services, prosecution of criminals, housing of criminals, provide healthcare, provide parks, protect & maintain protection of certain land, provide coast to coast rail, subsidize post secondary education, subsidize R&D in tech ranging from power generation to food production, garbage collection, garbage disposal, sanctions on environmental concerns, on and on and on and on, it in sum makes little difference in cost to me, how ever I strongly believe in the "Mission Statement" of my state where me and my fellow citizens are shareholders with one for one voting rights as opposed to the heavy handed profit driven mission statements of corporations. We know the destruction & corruption of such ideals. And democracy wins out.
     
    This isn't anecdotal, it is philosophical. There is not "right" answer. most agree with that. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all others." Churchill   Bah but he's British, and that place has a monarchy...what would he know of this stuff.

     
  2. #142 Gonzopoly*, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
    Anywhere? Pre-industrial America and today have some pretty major differences. Whose services? We were talking about a band of robbers calling themselves the government, how have you paid for the services of  the "government" the writers of the constitution declared themselves as? Today, if you have a car, at least you get roads and other public services like being able to call cops when someone infringes on your rights. 
     
    No, you cannot apply it anywhere. 
     
  3.  
    One can only hope such a great thing would happen.  Let's put the top 500 richest Americans on their own island and leave them there to jerk off onto piles of cash and cum stained copies of that shitty book.  I bet the nation would approve drastically.
     
  4. #144 Massholes, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
     
    Theres a need for sex with rapist. Doesn't make it right. 
     
  5.  
    There would be no one to steal from anymore lol, that was the point.
     
  6. #146 Massholes, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
     
    Apply it anywhere at any time in history. It doesn't matter what year or what date - if you declare yourself as government and give yourself some made up right to rob from people it will never be just. Just like you already believe that its absurd for someone to make it up.
     
     
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpsJKQR_ZE
     
     
    Cops never stop the problem. They arrive after the fact. They are also legally allowed to not provide protection yet I'm still forced to pay for that service. Only in a monopoly...
     
  7. #147 PeterParker, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
     
    You don't see that growth as happenstance, further more post WW2 saw the greatest increase in productivity...(Brittan says your welcome for the capital..oh snap..j/k)  but anyways technology improves productivity, and the interest of government isn't to deter it less a negative impact holistically.
     
    So provide support that 1900 was "greatest expansion of wealth". And what do you mean by wealth? if standard of living is your measure well you're way off. clearly from a goods and services perspective we are far better off today.
     
  8.  
    Dang, that was good.
     
  9. #149 Gonzopoly*, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
    What crazy person is gonna knock on your door, look in your eyes and say they're the new government? It should only be applied now, as that is the only time it's only valid and of any importance to us. What's happened has happened in the past. And I know of experiences in which cops have stopped problems, it happens all the time, the internet is full of videos of those kind of happenings.
     
    That guys BSing in the video, next time his cash is running low, tell him to do that. And watch what happens to him. You can read about him in the newspaper in the morning, or maybe you might even watch the news report.
     
    http://youtu.be/DuhKCiY-lu0
     
  10. Which shitty book?
    A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity
    Killing Jesus
    Who's Looking Out For You...?

    I have ten shitty books. And I'm sure all ten of them would be on THAT island! lol
     
  11.  
    Oh stealing would still take place on the island and here, don't kid yourself that is just a human flaw man.  It won't go away.
     
  12. #152 goober0331, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
     
    Theres a need for theft? People cant donate money? America already donates more than the rest of the world annually.
     
    No its not free, other people pay for it.
     
    Wal-Mart provides lower-priced products for lower-waged individuals, not hard to grasp.
     
    Democracy is majority/mob rule, 51% decide what the other 49% get to do. And oh hey, more of the "leave" argument. Its not semantics.
     
    And of course you think my view of voluntarism is idealized, when you support vast subsidies, which are just transfers of wealth (theft), living off the expense of others.
     
  13.  
    I can't wait for the prison confession/national best seller "Killing O'Reilly....How One Blowhard Cried Like A Little Bitch."
     
  14.  
    ahaha omg that's messed up!
     
    "Ohh gee I guess your right!" 
     
    Well, now maybe more I just think you're a wee bit messed up in the head.
     
  15. If I work my ass off and make a good living for myself and my family ill be damn if I will share it with a stranger who is too lazy to get off their asses to do the same thing.  I am not saying I wouldn't help others out because I would but I wouldn't help others out who just naturally expect a hand out because they are poor and I am comfortable in life.  Our life's are what we make it.  Some get the breaks others do not.  But there are several out there who want others to just pay the way for them while they don't do a damn thing to earn it and I will not do that after all my hard work to get where I am at.  Now to help one out to give them a leg up because they were never given the same breaks but they keep trying to improve their life's is a different story.
     
  16.  
    You misrepresent.
     
    The point was, redistribution of wealth was just stealing from others, specifically the wealthy, and the AS reference was just that, if those wealthy leave, there wouldnt be anyone left in America (relatively) to steal from.
     
  17.  
    with Limbaugh on top!
     
  18. "The measure of the state's success is that the word 'anarchy' frightens people, while the word 'state' does not." -- Joe Sobran
     
  19. #159 PeterParker, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 12, 2014
     
     
    Actually the other 49% subscribe to the principal of the democracy. See the whole agrees that even if they "lose" a particular vote, they agree not to kill the other 51% over it and will abide by the decision. Well, the hope is still out there for the US....by I'm checking the news daily....lucky it's a very very minute group that subscribe to your "God dang govenment stealing my money and calling it taxes....that's why I moved out to the woods & set up booby traps so they can't come get my money! I's smart so I strung some RJ45 from the city so I can still have innernet and tell the rest of the people theys being robbed! Come to the woods quick, come on 49% of you, com ehere where your money is safe from the theiving govment". I think both sides of that 51/49 vote would consider your views as anti-patriotic, but hey..don't leave. Some peeps aren't just hypocritical, they spew it and roll around in it.
     
    And yes that is how decisions are made...democratically. Perhaps you feel every one should subscribe to your ideals...well then carry on....cause here and there we subscribe to free speech....thank the government & courts for enforcing that right you like leaning on so heavily here. But whether 30 million or 300 million people there are plenty of points of view.
     
    So before they decide on anything they must subscribe to an axiom in democracy, "we won't get anywhere unless we work together."
     
  20. Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, the blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

     

Share This Page