Because you will provide it for free?
World's 85 richest have same wealth as 3.5 BILLION poorest
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
It's true that capitalism and socialism don't go together, and that it doesn't work.
People like scatterbrains eventually come up with the notion of culling the non producers e.g. the sick, old etc.
Rave on nazi man
A safety net for those is humane.
I did notice those at Davos do have a rich man's club agreeing to leave half their wealth to good causes. So not all bad from the billionaroes !!
Caring moderation etc. is the way to go. While not flushing the lot down the tubes uselessly imho
Hollande in France I seem to remember is proposing a 70% tax on the biggest incomes while Edd Balls in the UK is talking of a 50% rate. In the last 2 decades the rich have been getting richer and the poor poorer. The hogs at the top have been spreading too much of it amongst themselves. So viva the middle class bourgoisie. Evolution not revolution.
It's 75% actually, for incomes over 1million euro, hardly a huge amount and on top of other taxes. The first version of this law was deemed unconstitutional but the french government apparently came up with a new version, taxing the employer, which got a greenlight from the Conseil des Sages.
It has a cost to chase the most productive members of a country away. Also taxes have increased apparently for most french over the last couple of years, in a country already degrading its competitiveness ranking year after year - under both left and pseudo right wing governments. It's not so bright out there, hardly a country to look up to.
>>>@Scataphagos: I hope for the sake of intelligence that you understand that rich people can't have money without "poor" people. Money doesn't fall into your bank account, someone has to do the job and it's the majority of those you believe should never be born that fill the pockets of the wealthy.<<<
(Can't quote eurojack.... he's on ignore for stupid spew like this.)
COMPLETELY WRONG!
Most of the world's "3.5B which never should have been born" are either parsites and do nothing but suck blood from others because somebody "believes they deserve something", or are struggling to be fed in 3rd world countries. If people can't provide for their children until adulthood, THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE THEM. SOMEBODY WEAR A RUBBER!
Even in cases where some get rich by utilizing cheap labor... making clothes/shoes in low-wage countries... hey, nobody put a gun to those workers' heads to do those jobs. If they were ambitions enough and willing to do better for themselves, they would.
I believe EVERYBODY in the lower financial class in the US should have the opportunity to become become middle class. (And by "opportunity", I don't mean somebody should just hand them a well-paying job. Rather, the government should not encumber the effort to raise yourself up.) I also believe the government should NOT hand out enough benefits and subsidies to buy parasites a lifestyle they deem "acceptable". If you're OK with merely "hanging out, not working, getting high or getting drunk", other citizens should not have to pay for your lifestyle..... wouldn't let people starve/freeze to death, of course.
(Can't quote eurojack.... he's on ignore for stupid spew like this.)
COMPLETELY WRONG!
Most of the world's "3.5B which never should have been born" are either parsites and do nothing but suck blood from others because somebody "believes they deserve something", or are struggling to be fed in 3rd world countries. If people can't provide for their children until adulthood, THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE THEM. SOMEBODY WEAR A RUBBER!
Even in cases where some get rich by utilizing cheap labor... making clothes/shoes in low-wage countries... hey, nobody put a gun to those workers' heads to do those jobs. If they were ambitions enough and willing to do better for themselves, they would.
I believe EVERYBODY in the lower financial class in the US should have the opportunity to become become middle class. (And by "opportunity", I don't mean somebody should just hand them a well-paying job. Rather, the government should not encumber the effort to raise yourself up.) I also believe the government should NOT hand out enough benefits and subsidies to buy parasites a lifestyle they deem "acceptable". If you're OK with merely "hanging out, not working, getting high or getting drunk", other citizens should not have to pay for your lifestyle..... wouldn't let people starve/freeze to death, of course.
The US has been massively redistributing money to Blacks for about six decades and Black unemployment is the worst since the inception of the keeping of the stats... Common sense does not prevail among intellectual morons and they should not be allowed much sway.
ever consider the handouts since the 50's or so is a form of racism by the liberals to actually keep the unmotivated, and the lot "held down" ? essentially any wealth they create is under compensated so as to bring continuous additional wealth to the "haves". its all disguised as help....
please note i am not commenting on minimum wages (libertarian leanings here), etc..just a view that welfare was created for a deeper reason possibly.
Sort of. >>> ever consider the handouts since the 50's or so is a form of racism by the liberals to actually keep the unmotivated, and the lot "held down"<<<
I don't think it's racism per se. The Liberals have disdain for ALL of their believers and are happy to have anyone of any race dependent upon their handout so that they can be counted upon for the vote. However, (1) Charles Barkely once said, "poor blacks have been voting Democrat for 60 years and they're still poor", and (2) disgustingly, LBJ was alleged to have said upon signing Civil Rights legislation... "That'll keep the niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years". I don't think the Liberals are trying to "hold down" the parasites... just giving them enough so that if they just want to "hang out, not work, and get high"..... that'll be just fine.
As for, >>> essentially any wealth they create is under compensated so as to bring continuous additional wealth to the "haves".<<<. I disagree with the notion of "the rich getting rich off of the backs of the poor", and doing what they can to promote such exploitation. When the rich get richer in this country, the poor get richer too... just not in the same proportion... nor should they.
Politicos would have the limp-brained believe, "The pie is only so big. The more of it the rich get, the less there is for the poor". HOGWASH!
When the rich get richer in the US, THEY MAKE MORE PIE.... and the poor get more pie as well.
It might have been created for simple, honest reasons but impractically...
Your experience illustrates something very clear :
the key is education, or the financing of education.
If these kids were so originally intelligent, motivated, etc.... their parents would not need to fight to fork money for extra high quality tuitions.
I would like to see an experiment where "elite" primary, secondary and universities were financed to increase their intake 100 folds, and kids who traditionally are not expected in these places financed extra lessons : I am pretty sure less than 10% of these would be lazy, unemployed, etc...