The rich have all the money - so what it doesn't make any difference to you.

Quote: Gabes22

So people who screwed up their careers based upon their own actions? Why should I subsidize that? I have no sympathy for someone who has burned so many bridges they aren't able to be hired. I would suggest those people get jobs where they don't have to deal with people for large chunks of the day, like driving a truck or something like that

People can't help their personality that they acquired through a combination of genetics and life experience. And driving a truck you don't have to deal with people? Driving causes you to deal with the very worst of humanity, you must have never driven in any major US city during rush hour.

Would you hire a guy with a history of losing his temper to drive a truck for your company if you knew there was a very real possibility he could snap and run somebody off the road on purpose for cutting him off, opening you up to huge lawsuits?

Should a person like that just be left on the streets to starve? Should they be "put to sleep"? If not, you're going to end up subsidizing them in some way. Because those are your options.

Quote: darthxaos

You make the mistake of assuming physical disability is the only thing that can keep people from working. There are sometimes personality factors that can cause people to be unemployable. Some people don't have the "people skills" to get through the interview. Some people have a history of getting fired for interpersonal conflicts and no one will hire them.

You just described one of the major "bases" of the Democrat party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio

If you consider a metropolitan area with roughly 10 million people small, then I live in a small town. All i am saying is if sombeody rendered themselves not able to be hired by their own doings and actions that is 100% their fault. They should get a position where they don't have to deal with people. They are able bodied, they are not mentally ill. They should take care of themselves. I should not be forced to subsidize stupidity and it is laughable that there are people who feel sympathy for them

Quote: Gabes22

Does economic redistribution really bring the poor up?

Maybe not. Maybe wealth and power concentrated into a tiny percentage of the total population is good for everyone.

Quote: rxwine

Maybe not. Maybe wealth and power concentrated into a tiny percentage of the total population is good for everyone.

I don't think that is the answer either. I think the answer lies in between letting the poor rot, and taking it all from the rich. The thing nobody talks about is forcing the government to live within its means. Seven of the top 10 wealthiest counties in the US are within 100 miles of Washington DC. The numbers suggest the #1 business in America is government. That's a scary proposition as far as i am concerned

Quote: Gabes22

I don't think that is the answer either. I think the answer lies in between letting the poor rot, and taking it all from the rich. The thing nobody talks about is forcing the government to live within its means. Seven of the top 10 wealthiest counties in the US are within 100 miles of Washington DC. The numbers suggest the #1 business in America is government. That's a scary proposition as far as i am concerned

I wonder if that somehow relates to the fact the public sector unions are largest contributors to the democrats ;-)

Quote: rxwine

Maybe not. Maybe wealth and power concentrated into a tiny percentage of the total population is good for everyone.

So overweening envy is the reason for confiscating what the other person has.

Quote: Gabes22

If you consider a metropolitan area with roughly 10 million people small, then I live in a small town. All i am saying is if sombeody rendered themselves not able to be hired by their own doings and actions that is 100% their fault. They should get a position where they don't have to deal with people. They are able bodied, they are not mentally ill. They should take care of themselves. I should not be forced to subsidize stupidity and it is laughable that there are people who feel sympathy for them

What position in the modern economy involves not dealing with people?

Also, how are the personalities people formed through no fault of their own their own fault? How are people's level of intelligence, determined by genetics, their own fault?

Fault is a silly concept. If you really think about it, everything is the fault of the processes that produced the Big Bang.

Quote: SanchoPanza

So overweening envy is the reason for confiscating what the other person has.

On a global scale.

Quote: kenarman

...

Look at how good the asian immigrants to North America do. They come with nothing and are often refugees. They take a low paying job that the average North American turns their nose up at but keep there expenses at the level they are used to. In a few years they buy a business and still work long hours and live cheap. They have the money to put their kids through university and retire pretty well off once they sell the business and they started with absolutely nothing. But those born here want the government to tax the successfull and give them the money because they don't want to work.

I think an important component in Asian immigration is the importance they (and other homogenous groups) place on community growth. They come over with perhaps little to no financial assets, but with family, clan, community ties. They don't arrive randomly into strange cities (for the most part); they come into existing social structures which provide capital, work support, English lessons, and access to community contacts, special pricing on commodities and services sold within their group, and many other assistances.

As each new immigrant solidifies their asset growth, they in turn provide that assistance to those who arrive behind them. It's a completely essential ladder of opportunity that can only be accessed by the members of that group, and benefits the group as a whole. It trickles down in the generations with an educational pool for the kids as well as trade and retail opportunities for those family members, leading to more college graduations, better opportunities, less kids on the street, drug use, or isolation into uselessness.

It does, in fact, take a village to do well when "starting from nothing".

Quote: darthxaos

What position in the modern economy involves not dealing with people?

Also, how are the personalities people formed through no fault of their own their own fault? How are people's level of intelligence, determined by genetics, their own fault?

Fault is a silly concept. If you really think about it, everything is the fault of the processes that produced the Big Bang.

There are plenty of jobs in this country where you don't have to deal with customers. BTW their personalities are not their fault, their actions are

Quote: SanchoPanza

So overweening envy is the reason for confiscating what the other person has.

I was being sarcastic.

So you're in favor of writing taxation out of the Constitution maybe? And as far as I know, even progressive taxation is perfectly constitutional.

Quote: kenarman

I wonder if that somehow relates to the fact the public sector unions are largest contributors to the democrats ;-)

There was a time when working people thought the democrats represented them in government while they went about their daily toil.

They stayed bent over so long, they didn't notice when the "party" changed to "every man for himself". Worker bees are a little slow on the uptake. Now no one, not even their unions represent them. But Unions are the only hope they have.

Unless they are a gifted overachiever.

Beware, the Luddites are armed.

Quote: darthxaos

What position in the modern economy involves not dealing with people?

Plenty of jobs minimize dealing with people.

why 7 pages of discussion when the clear object of the thread is to troll anyone in disagreement?

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: TomG

I don't know. Why did you insist there was a problem?
I didn't, other folks have.

Not true. From what you wrote May 10th, 2015 at 4:33:05 PM PDT "The problem is you are being a greedy person if you believe you should get something from 'the rich' just because they have it!"

That is you very clearly stating that there is a problem. So I ask, Would the problem be solved if my beliefs were different?

Quote: TomG

Not true. From what you wrote May 10th, 2015 at 4:33:05 PM PDT "The problem is you are being a greedy person if you believe you should get something from 'the rich' just because they have it!"

That is you very clearly stating that there is a problem. So I ask, Would the problem be solved if my beliefs were different?

Not stating a general problem, I am saying person has a problem if they think they deserve something just because someone who is "rich" has something. And the problem they have is they are a greedy person.

Quote: rxwine

So you're in favor of writing taxation out of the Constitution maybe? And as far as I know, even progressive taxation is perfectly constitutional.

Nope on your question. I just don't agree with justifications I've seen for the Occupy Wall St.-style of pushing for even higher progressions with the primary motive being nothing more than confiscation of what a certain small but potent force deems to be "excessive holdings." Basically it is nonstop engine as a designated class is made the target. Except of course for chosen gods like vocal Hollywood stars and producers along with sports and entertainment stars. All highly valued but questionable contributors to the once giant American machine of producing real products.

Quote: AZDuffman

You have me confused with someone else. Others are the ones saying that they deserve something just because "the rich" have it, I have been arguing against it. Those that argue for higher tax rates and such on "the rich" to "pay their fair share" are the thugs.

Those that argue for taxation on anyone are the "thugs". Not just the rich.