Is Wealth Redistribution A Good Thing?

[Humpy]

Quote from oldtime:

very dangerous Humpy, I've seen it in action, both the husband and wife work at the same factory, and their combined income puts them above the 50% average, yet they still claim they are just "middle class."

"Middle Class" gives the politicians and the government too much power.

We just went through it over here when they debated whether they should raise taxes on 250K plus and then decided that was middle class and raised it to 450K.

No, start thinking this way, if you are in the top 50 percentile you are rich, if you are in the bottom 50 percentile you are poor.

You will need that more in the future than you will the "Middle Class."

By the rich I mean about the top 10% and the poor about the bottom 60% which by my maths makes the middle class about the middle 30%.

The rich are so wealthy they needn't bother too much. They could be generous but are largely mean.The 60% poor shouldn't let such things as principles, generosity etc. get in their way. They need to survive but are largely generous when they should be mean. even when that isn't realistically an option.
The middle class imho work hard and promote the better things in life.

 

[nutmeg]

Quote from Humpy:

They could be generous but are largely mean.

Oh for chrissakes look around. You can visit a library built by rich men for poor men. Shakespeare in the park (central park nyc) is funded by the wealthy so the poor can experience culture for free. Hospitals, universities, etc built or additions or endowments for the benefit of everyone built by the rich.

One can probably walk through more doors opened by the rich with no strings attached to benefit the common man than anything the gov't built.

 

[oldtime]

well, it's kind of hard to have a good old fashioned class war, when almost everybody is in the middle undecided

especially when the politicians decide who is "middle class"

you have to fight for what you have or what you have lost

if you made it into the top 50% they will do everything to bring you back down to where you started

and if you have dropped down below the 50% into the poor, then you want policies which make your journey back up to be as unrestricted as possible

and that is why I ask, Is wealth redistribution a good idea?

how does that help me if I am poor become rich?

won't it just continually raise the bar? Now I'm making 50k, that use to be rich, now it is poor

and in ten years I will be making 75k, which today is rich, but by then will be poor

so no matter what, I will always be poor, until I can make more than 50% of what others make

It's the governments job to make sure I am always caught in the middle, that's the only way they can control me

if I get too rich, or too poor I become a problem

 

[justrading]

Quote from nutmeg:

Oh for chrissakes look around. You can visit a library built by rich men for poor men. Shakespeare in the park (central park nyc) is funded by the wealthy so the poor can experience culture for free. Hospitals, universities, etc built or additions or endowments for the benefit of everyone built by the rich.

One can probably walk through more doors opened by the rich with no strings attached to benefit the common man than anything the gov't built.

Let's not confuse the philanthropists with the rich.

In my experience, if one suffers a reversal of fortune, help is more likely to be forthcoming from the poor rather than the rich.

 

[justrading]

Quote from oldtime:


if I get too rich, or too poor I become a problem

If you get too poor you become a bloody nuisance; good grief the politicians may actually have to do something for you and your ilk. Can't you do the decent thing and look after yourself, or else just die quietly so they can spend their time on more important things?

On the other hand, if you become too rich, goodness what a fine citizen you are, and oh by the way we have all these fine upstanding politicians up for re-election and as you are such a dear friend, we know you'll do the right thing.

The only place I know of where being too rich can be hazardous is Russia, but then only if Putin is not your buddy.

 

[oldtime]

Quote from justrading:

If you get too poor you become a bloody nuisance; good grief the politicians may actually have to do something for you and your ilk. Can't you do the decent thing and look after yourself, or else just die quietly so they can spend their time on more important things?

On the other hand, if you become too rich, goodness what a fine citizen you are, and oh by the way we have all these fine upstanding politicians up for re-election and as you are such a dear friend, we know you'll do the right thing.

The only place I know of where being too rich can be hazardous is Russia, but then only if Putin is not your buddy.

the point is, it's important for the politicans to create a "middle class" since that is what most people are, and they need their votes.

the definition of the "middle class" is constantly changing

it is a very dangerous classification of people, and it is important to them to convince you that you are part of it

so wealth redistribution never affects you.

It is taken from the rich (which you have now been reclassified into "Middle Class")

and given to the poor (Which even though you are just making it paycheck to paycheck you no longer classify as, because somebody is poorer than you.)

so nothing affects you anymore, because it is all just wealth redistribution from the rich (which you are not) and given to the poor (which you are also not)

all in hopes of creating the "Great Middle Class" Karl Marx's dream

It actually has worked out ok in the NFL, parity has made teams more evenly matched, no more rich dynasties

 

[justrading]

Quote from oldtime:

all in hopes of creating the "Great Middle Class" Karl Marx's dream

It actually has worked out ok in the NFL, parity has made teams more evenly matched, no more rich dynasties

Isn't the middle class transitory in Marxist theory?

"Note on the Middle Class. The issue of the middle class or classes appears to be a major issue within Marxian theory, one often addressed by later Marxists. Many Marxists attempt to show that the middle class is declining, and polarization of society into two classes is a strong tendency within capitalism. Marx's view was that the successful members of the middle class would become members of the bourgeoisie, while the unsuccessful would be forced into the proletariat. In the last few years, many have argued that in North America, and perhaps on a world scale, there is an increasing gap between rich and poor and there is a declining middle."

http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/o402.htm

As for NFL, perhaps the English Premier League could learn something here. I stopped following soccer a long time ago but from what I read the inequality means a lot of same old same old, and people love the FA Cup because of minnows defeating giants.

 

[oldtime]

Quote from justrading:

Isn't the middle class transitory in Marxist theory?

"Note on the Middle Class. The issue of the middle class or classes appears to be a major issue within Marxian theory, one often addressed by later Marxists. Many Marxists attempt to show that the middle class is declining, and polarization of society into two classes is a strong tendency within capitalism. Marx's view was that the successful members of the middle class would become members of the bourgeoisie, while the unsuccessful would be forced into the proletariat. In the last few years, many have argued that in North America, and perhaps on a world scale, there is an increasing gap between rich and poor and there is a declining middle."

http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/o402.htm

As for NFL, perhaps the English Premier League could learn something here. I stopped following soccer a long time ago but from what I read the inequality means a lot of same old same old, and people love the FA Cup because of minnows defeating giants.

yes, the "Middle Class" needs to be totally eliminated

You are either rich

or you are poor

if you make more than 50% you are rich

if you make less than 50% you are poor

 

[justrading]

Quote from oldtime:

yes, the "Middle Class" needs to be totally eliminated

You are either rich

or you are poor

if you make more than 50% you are rich

if you make less than 50% you are poor

Never thought much of Marxist theory, but sometimes what is said rings true.

"Thus, MiIiband concluded, a dominant economic class continued to exist and to exercise economic power in the private sector and he then argued also that this dominant economic class was also a politically dominant ruling class which exercised decisive power over the State such that the capitalist state served the interests of the dominant class usually at the expense of the rest of the population."

Sound familiar?

http://www.earlhamsociologypages.co.uk/marxclasscap.htm

 

[oldtime]

Quote from justrading:

Never thought much of Marxist theory, but sometimes what is said rings true.

"Thus, MiIiband concluded, a dominant economic class continued to exist and to exercise economic power in the private sector and he then argued also that this dominant economic class was also a politically dominant ruling class which exercised decisive power over the State such that the capitalist state served the interests of the dominant class usually at the expense of the rest of the population."

Sound familiar?

http://www.earlhamsociologypages.co.uk/marxclasscap.htm

well, the problem with these kids today is they don't smoke pot.

Mussolini said he wanted the government and business to be so tight you couldn't even slide a rolling paper between them

nowadays, most people don't even know what a rolling paper is