Republican Judgement

[Panacea]

I question the work and sacrifice assertion, it sounds more like admiration than necessarily fact.

 

[Accountable]

I question the work and sacrifice assertion, it sounds more like admiration than necessarily fact.

Are you aware of a way that I can become a billionaire without work or sacrifice?

 

[Codrus]

Are you aware of a way that I can become a billionaire without work or sacrifice?

i hear politics is a good way

 

[Johnfromokc]

No. You neglected to ask the question needed to base this question upon: Am I willing to do the work and make the sacrifices necessary to become a millionaire/billionaire or 1% income earner? That answer is also No.

At least you are honest. That said, why the "hero worship"? Do you honestly believe taxing 25% of a families income that earns $50,000 annually has the same economic impact on a family earning $350,000? The tax code is progressive for a reason. Those who benefit MOST from our taxpayer infrastructure should pay the MOST. Do the math. Think you would suffer living on 75% of $350,000?

I was commenting on Mr Buffet's desire to force all of society to live by his code of morality and ethics. Should society force you to act on my code of morality and ethics? I don't think so. There are other ways to keep your "aristocracy" boogeymen from controlling the country than by taking their property unjustly.

Another question for you. Why does society have laws to keep us from harming, killing and stealing from each other? According to your thought process, society should not force me to act on your code of morality and ethics. So, moving along your logic track, we don't need laws to keep people honest. People will, of their own goodness of heart, not break into your house, rape your wife, kill your family, and steal your posessions, right? Go, right now, leave your keys in the ignition of all your cars, and don't lock your doors of your home. When you go hang out downtown at the Alamo and eat at the nice riverwalk dining establishments, leave the keys in your car and a couple Ben Franklins protruding from your breast pocket.

That scenario in the paragraph above was absurd wasn't it? Knowing we have laws for a reason, doesn't it make sense that if we have laws protecting us from criminal harm from the less honest and more violent among us, that we must have laws protecting society from those who would attempt to harm society by the hoarding of wealth and power? It is a FACT that humans of their own accord will screw over other humans if there is not a larger society with a legal system attempting to prevent it.

Why do you think we have labor laws and worker safety laws? I mean after all, corporations don't need laws to do the right thing by workers do they? I mean, they would never force children to work in factories would they? They would never force workers to operate machinery that was inherently unsafe would they? They would automatically pay a fair wage and give you weekends off and a 40 hour work week without those greedy collective bargaining laws and minimum wage and safety laws wouldn't they? The bosses would never expect women to put out sexually in order to get promoted or simply remain employed would they? What do we need all these ridiculous laws for anyway?

A gift? It should be tax-free.

Cool! So I can just claim my annual salary as a gift from my employer and pay no taxes! And my Schedule C income is gifts from my customers! WooHooo! I'm feeling richer already!

 

[Accountable]

i hear politics is a good way

LOL! Holy crap! You have to sell your soul & mortgage the wife for politics!

 

[Accountable]

At least you are honest. That said, why the "hero worship"? Do you honestly believe taxing 25% of a families income that earns $50,000 annually has the same economic impact on a family earning $350,000?

There is no hero worship here, only equal respect for people's property.

The tax code is progressive for a reason. Those who benefit MOST from our taxpayer infrastructure should pay the MOST. Do the math. Think you would suffer living on 75% of $350,000?

It's not relevant whether someone would suffer more or less. The purpose for taxation is not and never has been "because they have enough already," though you'd never know that from listening to you and others who want to tax the rich because they are rich. Taxation has become a game of maximizing revenue and then figuring out what we can do with the money, when it should be figuring out what is the absolute minimum we NEED government to do, figuring out the most cost effective way of providing that, then graciously and apologetically requiring the funds from the people that earned them.

Another question for you. Why does society have laws to keep us from harming, killing and stealing from each other? According to your thought process, society should not force me to act on your code of morality and ethics. So, moving along your logic track, we don't need laws to keep people honest.

You either don't understand my thought process or are purposely misrepresenting it. Either way, it's presumptuous & I'd appreciate it if you would stop pretending you know my thoughts. Society has laws to protect the rights of all. It has no business imposing morals, only balance. We do not allow one to steal from or kill another person because it violates the victim's right to property ownership or life. Government-forced redistribution of wealth also violates that responsibility to protect our right of property ownership.

That scenario in the paragraph above was absurd wasn't it? Knowing we have laws for a reason, doesn't it make sense that if we have laws protecting us from criminal harm from the less honest and more violent among us, that we must have laws protecting society from those who would attempt to harm society by the hoarding of wealth and power?

So now you would make hoarding illegal? How many cans of beans can I have in my basement before you send the police to confiscate and redistribute them? To hoard is to keep and protect for future use. Power of the type I assume you mean (rather than electrical power) cannot be hoarded. Like the fictional fiat dollar, it must be kept in circulation or lose its value. Hoarding wealth harms society? How much jail time should we give Mr Buffet?

Why do you think we have labor laws and worker safety laws?

Laws are good and necessary when it keeps honest people honest. Safety is easy to neglect and hide from view, as is cutting corners in most manufacturing processes, which necessitates the laws. As companies become larger, and especially when ownership and responsibility is blurred by corporation, it becomes very easy to use anonymity to shirk responsibility and blame others for neglect or abuse, or to claim no one at all is responsible and blame "the system," thus avoiding any negative consequence at all.

 

[Panacea]

Are you aware of a way that I can become a billionaire without work or sacrifice?

Yes, the right connections and a pulse.

 

[Minor Axis]

The purpose for taxation is not and never has been "because they have enough already," though you'd never know that from listening to you and others who want to tax the rich because they are rich.

A progressive tax code, one we have lived under since at least the 1900s is exactly that. Those who make more can pay a higher % because they can afford it.

 

[Zorak]

Yes, the right connections and a pulse.

The only correct answer would be to be born into it.

Your answer is a little disrespectful to those who risked a lot to start up their businesses... I won't condemn them for succeeding.

 

[Panacea]

The only correct answer would be to be born into it.

Your answer is a little disrespectful to those who risked a lot to start up their businesses... I won't condemn them for succeeding.

My point is to illustrate outstanding success has a continuum of causes, all things considered. I don't believe hard work and sacrifice always translates to billionaire status (ask a middle class single parent about "hard work and sacrifice"), nor does billionaire status always indicate hard work and sacrifice.

 

[Minor Axis]

We group together in civilizations for mutual benefit. If you come up with a real good idea that appeals to the masses you become a million/billionaire. Does a moral sense tell you that if someone manages to work the system and makes a fortune then they deserve to keep it all or can they afford to pay much more to support the system that gave them the opportunity to become rich? I've said it before, but I don't believe anyone needs more than a million dollars a year to live on, in fact the vast majority would be thrilled to live on just a measly $300k per year. So while I acknowledge the moral necessity of individuals supporting themselves and being productive members of society, I question a system that allows a few billionaires on one end and masses of poor on the other.

 

[Panacea]

We group together in civilizations for mutual benefit. If you come up with a real good idea that appeals to the masses you become a million/billionaire. Does a moral sense tell you that if someone manages to work the system and makes a fortune then they deserve to keep it all or can they afford to pay much more to support the system that gave them the opportunity to become rich? I've said it before, but I don't believe anyone needs more than a million dollars a year to live on, in fact the vast majority would be thrilled to live on just a measly $300k per year. So while I acknowledge the moral necessity of individuals supporting themselves and being productive members of society, I question a system that allows a few billionaires on one end and masses of poor on the other.

I think this is really the core of the difference between the mainstream ideologies we see in the US.
We cannot ignore the crisis regarding the middle class' evaporation, it shouldn't be about rewarding the lazy and punishing the successful,but addressing the crisis that is being ignored. Defend those with great success and condemn those with no success all you'd like, but nearly every person posting in this thread is a lot closer to failure than success. Just like the debt problem, however we feel about what is morally right or wrong, there is a crisis to be dealt with.

 

[Tangerine]

We group together in civilizations for mutual benefit. If you come up with a real good idea that appeals to the masses you become a million/billionaire. Does a moral sense tell you that if someone manages to work the system and makes a fortune then they deserve to keep it all or can they afford to pay much more to support the system that gave them the opportunity to become rich? I've said it before, but I don't believe anyone needs more than a million dollars a year to live on, in fact the vast majority would be thrilled to live on just a measly $300k per year. So while I acknowledge the moral necessity of individuals supporting themselves and being productive members of society, I question a system that allows a few billionaires on one end and masses of poor on the other.

Without the incentive to ever become a millionaire or billionaire, how many people would actually bother to put in the time and effort to create ideas and things that benefit our society if there was no reward for them in the end? This is the flaw in socialism. Productivity and innovation are lost in the ill-fated quest for equality.

 

[Zorak]

My point is to illustrate outstanding success has a continuum of causes, all things considered. I don't believe hard work and sacrifice always translates to billionaire status (ask a middle class single parent about "hard work and sacrifice"), nor does billionaire status always indicate hard work and sacrifice.

Success does come in many forms, but I will never belittle or punish people because of it.

Without the incentive to ever become a millionaire or billionaire, how many people would actually bother to put in the time and effort to create ideas and things that benefit our society if there was no reward for them in the end? This is the flaw in socialism. Productivity and innovation are lost in the ill-fated quest for equality.

Well I could talk all day about the flaws in socialism, but that is the main one. Human's have never been socialists, the first tribes of humans knew the values of having people specialise in particular areas. Specialisation is the cornerstone of progression and a gift to posterity.

 

[Panacea]

Success does come in many forms, but I will never belittle or punish people because of it.

Am I doing so?

 

[Zorak]

Am I doing so?

No, fair enough.

 

[Panacea]

No, fair enough.

I understand not standing by bullying the haves, but it isn't my intent.

 

[Minor Axis]

Without the incentive to ever become a millionaire or billionaire, how many people would actually bother to put in the time and effort to create ideas and things that benefit our society if there was no reward for them in the end? This is the flaw in socialism. Productivity and innovation are lost in the ill-fated quest for equality.

Granted I've not researched this (has anyone?), but I think (hope) your wrong. If we (the human race) are truly superior or want to be superior, there must be human motivations beyond greed and self enrichment. Humans are creative, they have vision, they can be altruistic and can be generous. BTW, socialism does not have to mean rigid equality, but it can limit the extremes on both ends.

Well I could talk all day about the flaws in socialism, but that is the main one. Human's have never been socialists, the first tribes of humans knew the values of having people specialise in particular areas. Specialisation is the cornerstone of progression and a gift to posterity.

I'm not trying to start something but do you know what your talking about? Socialism as an economic system has just as many "specialists" as capitalism. The relevant question is how much compensation do individuals functioning within the confines of civilization require?

 

[Accountable]

Yes, the right connections and a pulse.

That's the most naive comment I think I've read here. Certainly the most naive from you.

My point is to illustrate outstanding success has a continuum of causes, all things considered. I don't believe hard work and sacrifice always translates to billionaire status (ask a middle class single parent about "hard work and sacrifice"), nor does billionaire status always indicate hard work and sacrifice.

Hard work and sacrifice does not always translate to billionaire status. Hard work and sacrifice almost never translates to billionaire status. Lack of hard work and sacrifice NEVER translates to billionaire status. Even heirs benefit from the hard work and sacrifice of others, though you can bet that most are themselves hard working sacrificers, despite the stereotype.

Name one billionaire that has never worked hard nor sacrificed.

 

[Accountable]

The purpose for taxation is not and never has been "because they have enough already," though you'd never know that from listening to you and others who want to tax the rich because they are rich.

A progressive tax code, one we have lived under since at least the 1900s is exactly that. Those who make more can pay a higher % because they can afford it.

:confused Right, which is what the rest of my post explains. That is what taxation has become, despite the stated purpose.