People don't seem to understand this (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 08:36:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  People don't seem to understand this (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: People don't seem to understand this  (Read 3995 times)
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« on: October 11, 2004, 10:08:57 PM »

that's why we don't want to destroy money or remove it from the marketplace, but rather sieze and redistribute it.

Sieze and redistribute sounds a bit like theft.
Logged
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2004, 10:37:35 PM »
« Edited: October 11, 2004, 10:39:34 PM by David S »

The real theft is that of the highest class from the working people.

Sounds like you believe in the constant pie theory, meaning that there is only so much wealth available. If one person takes a bigger slice for himself then everyone else gets a smaller piece. But what if someone makes the pie bigger. Yes he still gets a huge part for himself but everyone else also gets more than they had before.

Lets use a really rich guy, Bill Gates, as an example. He made himself extremely rich, but in the process he built a company that makes useful products that most of us use everyday (and some of us even like using them!) In addition his company employs about 15,000 people, last time I checked. So he's also created jobs for lots of people.
Besides that he's a philanthropist and has donated millions of dollars to good causes. Whats so bad about that? Seems to me that everyone is better off.
Logged
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2004, 11:17:08 PM »

Lets take another example. In the early 1980's Chrysler Corporation was on the verge of bankruptcy. This would have put many thousands of employees out of work and resulted in huge losses for the stockholders. Lee Iacocca stepped in and turned things around. Within a few years the company had paid off its debts and returned to profitability.  For the first year or two Iacocca  took no salary, but once the company became profitable his compensation went up to obscene levels.

So he saved the jobs of thousands of employees, paid off the debts that the company would have defaulted on, and prevented huge losses for the stockholders. Did he deserve his huge salary? I say yes.
Logged
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2004, 12:06:51 AM »

I've never made enough to qualify and probably won't this year (probably will next year though), but I currently get about 15% of my paycheck removed in payroll taxes.

Unless you are self employed they only take 7.65% for soc sec and medicare together. http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/taxRates.html Your employer kicks in another 7.65% on your behalf but you never see that in your check stub.

Also you don't pay a penny in income taxes but you want to fund all kinds of giveaway programs using money from  those who do pay income taxes. Not very nice of you.

It would be poetic justice if you worked your tail off to become really rich only to see your assets seized and redistributed by some future BRTD.   Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 11 queries.