Whats wrong with sharing the wealth?

Many people accuse Obama's ideals to be socialist. My question is, whats wrong with the rich becoming a little bit less rich in order to support the poor.I think it's fair to tax the rich even more than they are being taxed. Its not like the middle and lower class taxes are really helpful to the gov. Since the distribution of wealth in America is soo skewed, why not redistribute wealth?

Some argue that the rich deserve all the money they make and should be treated the same as the poor. also thay believe that the poor are poor for a reason. Well what about poor people born into poor families going to a poor school with poor education?

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

efrucht

Many people accuse Obama's ideals to be socialist. My question is, whats wrong with the rich becoming a little bit less rich in order to support the poor.I think it's fair to tax the rich even more than they are being taxed. Its not like the middle and lower class taxes are really helpful to the gov. Since the distribution of wealth in America is soo skewed, why not redistribute wealth?

Some argue that the rich deserve all the money they make and should be treated the same as the poor. also thay believe that the poor are poor for a reason. Well what about poor people born into poor families going to a poor school with poor education?

nippon_gamer

Because i'm not sharing my money with other low life's.airg6

You becoming wealthy depends on those 'low lifes.'

[QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

DivergeUnify

Its not like the gov takes all your money. It's very obvious that Reagan's "trickle down" theory is a failiure.nippon_gamer

[QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

DivergeUnify

no you should be taxed based on how much you make. bill gates getting taxed 25% on his income and you'r family getting taxed 25% on their income is not fair.

Don't tax anyone under a certain bracket anything and have a fixed tax for everyone above thatDivergeUnify

Easier said than done. The country needs to bring in a lot of money to stay viable. And it's much easier to think about axing social programs that are deeply entwined in American society and actually doing it. A lot of people would be justifiably ticked off if the social security program they had been supporting for their entire life was suddenly axed because a bunch of rich babies feel it's unfair to pay their dues to the society that enabled them to become wealthy.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

efrucht

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]Don't tax anyone under a certain bracket anything and have a fixed tax for everyone above thatpianist

Easier said than done. The country needs to bring in a lot of money to stay viable. And it's much easier to think about axing social programs that are deeply entwined in American society and actually doing it. A lot of people would be justifiably ticked off if the social security program they had been supporting for their entire life was suddenly axed because a bunch of rich babies feel it's unfair to pay their dues to the society that enabled them to become wealthy.

a) make it optional( if it is even an option at this point since the program is in debt and people are starting to retire)

b) keep the money put into SS AWAY from government budget

Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.HardQuor

Some maybe. But I'd be surprised if they represent a majority. Philanthropy is hardly a unique idea amongst the wealthy. If they really hated the poor and saw them as worthless, you wouldn't have any philanthropy occurring.

[QUOTE="efrucht"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

DivergeUnify

its called responsibility to support other who are less fortunate. This country made you rich so u repay it.

The money belongs to who it belongs to... not the governmentDivergeUnify

I don't really see the point in having a bunch of money when people can live if that's given to them. Honestly, it's pretty disturbing that some people stayed selfish their whole lives.

Should someone who had made better desicions or work harder have to give up what he makes to someone who made bad decisions and didn't work as hard?

Sharing the wealth isn't good it just isn't. Normally with tax CUTS you allow buinesses to grow (new and old) and grow the job options...though there's plenty of jobs out there right now >.> that no one wants to take.

Also I'd rather choose the amount I give (fund raiser, nonprofit etc.) instead of Government just sucking it out and not really giving good options on distribution.

its called responsibility to support other who are less fortunate. This country made you rich so u repay it.

nippon_gamer

[QUOTE="HardQuor"]Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.pianist

Some maybe. But I'd be surprised if they represent a majority. Philanthropy is hardly a unique idea amongst the wealthy. If they really hated the poor and saw them as worthless, you wouldn't have any philanthropy occurring.

Because it makes you a commi. End of story. :P

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

nippon_gamer

its called responsibility to support other who are less fortunate. This country made you rich so u repay it.

Social Security shouldn't be axed, but it should be fixed.

a) make it optional( if it is even an option at this point since the program is in debt and people are starting to retire)

b) keep the money put into SS AWAY from government budget

DivergeUnify

Fixing is good. But if you only fix it, the program is still enormously expensive. Tack on the debt servicing, military, and infrastructure maintenance, and you have a hefty bill right there. Now, when most of the money in the country is earned by a small minority, it means that in order to raise enough to continue to function, you need to tax that minority more. If you use a flat tax, you'll either end up with not enough money coming in, or with a tax which is too heavy on the people who don't make nearly as much.

Let's say one guy earns $1 000 000 and another earns $50 000. A 30% tax rate would bring in $315 000. It would leave the second guy with just $35 000. So let's lower it to 20%. Now the second guy is left with $40 000, but the goverment brings in just $210 000. That's a big drop that results in just $5000 more spending cash for the second guy. Most people in America earn closer to $50 000 than they do to $1 000 000. So you can see the problem with the flat tax here. The government would never be able to bring in enough cash while at the same time ensuring that the vast majority of people in the country pay a realistic amount of tax.

There's only so much pie to go around. Take more pie, pay for more pie. Or the pie stops getting made.

If you took all the richest people, took EVERY penny they have, and try to run America you would only be able to run it for a few days. The richest individual is Bill Gates, he is worth $85 billion. Add him to all the other supper rich and you'll have around $900 billion at the most. However, it takes trillions to run the country for a day. The money doesn't exist. The first thing he is going do is say something along the lines of: "the Republics lied, the country is in worst chape than we thought and I won't be able to fulfill some of my promises. We can't just tax these people so instead are we not only going to tax these people, but we're also going to tax them, you, back there. you, over there, and you." Bet you $50 he will.Nerkcon

first of all it doesn't take trillions to run a country each day. the budget for last YEAR was 2.8 trillion. and secondly the top 5% of america could pay for it without a problem.

[QUOTE="nippon_gamer"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

Nerkcon

its called responsibility to support other who are less fortunate. This country made you rich so u repay it.

i mean everyone. Do you really think rich people need all of that money? I think the first rule to being a decent person is to be able to forgive others for the mistakes they make. Do you really think people are living a good life off wellfare? plus i'd rather save one truely unfortunate person and a bunch of dead beat losers then save noone at all.

By 'less fortunate'... are you talking about people who honestly can't take of themselves? Like 18 year olds who were kicked out of the house with no support and $100? People who were born with problems so they can't work? People who got their crit stolen and own hundreds of thousands to banks for buying thing they didn't want? Or idiots who think they should be able to live decently off of Welfare? People who work very little at small class jobs but want to live like rich people? Or people who took big loans for a nice new car and house and don't want to pay it off?Nerkcon

Living on welfare is barely living at all. I think there are very few people on welfare who are genuinely happy with their lives. Yes, it was often their own choices that put them there - but quite frankly, it's better to pay them a little than have them all put onto the streets. You know what they'd resort to in order to survive if that were the case. Our prisons are crowded enough already.

Robin Hood's intentions may have been pure, but he was still a lawless thief.Dark__Link

He was also a hero. A fictional character written to teach people the morals of a decent human being.

[QUOTE="Nerkcon"]If you took all the richest people, took EVERY penny they have, and try to run America you would only be able to run it for a few days. The richest individual is Bill Gates, he is worth $85 billion. Add him to all the other supper rich and you'll have around $900 billion at the most. However, it takes trillions to run the country for a day. The money doesn't exist. The first thing he is going do is say something along the lines of: "the Republics lied, the country is in worst chape than we thought and I won't be able to fulfill some of my promises. We can't just tax these people so instead are we not only going to tax these people, but we're also going to tax them, you, back there. you, over there, and you." Bet you $50 he will.nippon_gamer

first of all it doesn't take trillions to run a country each day. the budget for last YEAR was 2.8 trillion. and secondly the top 5% of america could pay for it without a problem.

Yeah... don't know where he came up with that figure. Maybe if you take into account ALL financial transactions that occur throughout the entire country, both public and private. But for a government to spend trillions to run for a day? No way.

Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.HardQuor

[QUOTE="Dark__Link"]Robin Hood's intentions may have been pure, but he was still a lawless thief.nippon_gamer

He was also a hero. A fictional character written to teach people the morals of a decent human being.

Yup, a depraved little miscreant.

[QUOTE="Nerkcon"][QUOTE="nippon_gamer"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="efrucht"]

America has always been an individualistic society. Socialism is hated with a passion 'round these parts.

It isn't fair to tax the rich more, in fact, it isn't fair to tax different people different amounts. Unfortunately, we have yet to think of a better way.

nippon_gamer

its called responsibility to support other who are less fortunate. This country made you rich so u repay it.

i mean everyone. Do you really think rich people need all of that money? I think the first rule to being a decent person is to be able to forgive others for the mistakes they make. Do you really think people are living a good life off wellfare? plus i'd rather save one truely unfortunate person and a bunch of dead beat losers then save noone at all.

pianist, to play devil's advocate, would do you say to those who call Barack Obama's tax plan welfare? Those who say your are punishing the rich with such a plan? Or those who call such practices socialism?

[QUOTE="HardQuor"]Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.Brainkiller05

It's called responsibility people cannot become rich with out the existence of the less frotunate.

Also I'd rather choose the amount I give (fund raiser, nonprofit etc.) instead of Government just sucking it out and not really giving good options on distribution.

mechwarrior_bob

I've always felt people would be more agreeable when it comes to taxation if they had some say as to where their money was going. Basic services would, of course, have to be maintained whether you agree with them or not. But putting power in the hands of the individual to choose where a portion of his tax dollars go (directly, that is) would certainly make a lot of people more willing to part with their dough.

We can't trust people to be generous, though, especially when they don't bring in a lot of money to begin with. Given the choice, many people who make $50 000 a year wouldn't donate one thin dime to charity or tax, because they'd much rather spend the cash on things THEY want to buy. It's the people who have money to burn and those who feel a moral obligation to give who are donating to charity.

[QUOTE="nippon_gamer"]

[QUOTE="Nerkcon"]If you took all the richest people, took EVERY penny they have, and try to run America you would only be able to run it for a few days. The richest individual is Bill Gates, he is worth $85 billion. Add him to all the other supper rich and you'll have around $900 billion at the most. However, it takes trillions to run the country for a day. The money doesn't exist. The first thing he is going do is say something along the lines of: "the Republics lied, the country is in worst chape than we thought and I won't be able to fulfill some of my promises. We can't just tax these people so instead are we not only going to tax these people, but we're also going to tax them, you, back there. you, over there, and you." Bet you $50 he will.pianist

first of all it doesn't take trillions to run a country each day. the budget for last YEAR was 2.8 trillion. and secondly the top 5% of america could pay for it without a problem.

Yeah... don't know where he came up with that figure. Maybe if you take into account ALL financial transactions that occur throughout the entire country, both public and private. But for a government to spend trillions to run for a day? No way.

[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"][QUOTE="HardQuor"]Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.nippon_gamer

It's called responsibility people cannot become rich with out the existence of the less frotunate.

lol celebs dont mind but some of you losers will listen to your whining parents and called Obama a socalist. Any who has a college education in business knows we are a mixed economy. Mostly Capitalism and some Socialism. We have been more and more Capitalist for the last 8 years. Its time to invest in our country and stop wasting money on other countries.YoungRay20

A college education doesn't mean you know anything about politics. I currently attend UCSD a top 50 school in all of america and you know what? I havent taken any polisci classes and am very naive about the reality of american politics. My friend who also goes here actually told me she was going to vote yes on prop 8 becasue she didn't want reletives to be able to get married. that should tell you something about the worthlessness of a college education sometimes.

whats wrong with keeping what you make?lazzordude

Nothing. A truth most of these people would accept if they actually had any significant wealth to their name.

[QUOTE="nippon_gamer"]

[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"][QUOTE="HardQuor"]Rich people somehow think that they're better people in all ways than poor people. Or rather, that poor people are worthless and the scum of society.Brainkiller05

It's called responsibility people cannot become rich with out the existence of the less frotunate.

It's a moral responsibility. This country allowed you to make money now you should do ur best to make the country better.

pianist, to play devil's advocate, would do you say to those who call Barack Obama's tax plan welfare? Those who say your are punishing the rich with such a plan? Or those who call such practices socialism?

Link256

Well, it's not punishing the rich. It's using a logical tax plan that will ensure the government can bring in the money it needs to fund the programs that keep society running as smoothly as possible. That's to the advantage of everyone, including the people who pay the most in taxes. Their livelihood is dependent on a healthy, educated workforce that has money to spend on what they produce.

You know, the richest people I know don't complain much about taxes. Their accountants tell them what they need to pay and they pay it without complaint. They don't feel 'punished' when taxes go up, because it's really no skin off their back. The people who complain the most are those who don't make much, because they actually feel the effects of taxation.

People got too used to Republican level taxation - which is not viable. Ironically, 'raising taxes' often means simply restoring order to a broken system by rationally charging more from those who earn more. It's not 'fair' or even, but neither is income. And like it or not, if you have a big income, it's because of society. So you need to pay more.

[QUOTE="lazzordude"]whats wrong with keeping what you make?Dark__Link

Nothing. A truth most of these people would accept if they actually had any significant wealth to their name.

Again, the wealthy people I know are the ones who tend to care the least about taxation levels.

[QUOTE="Dark__Link"]

[QUOTE="lazzordude"]whats wrong with keeping what you make?pianist

Nothing. A truth most of these people would accept if they actually had any significant wealth to their name.

Again, the wealthy people I know are the ones who tend to care the least about taxation levels.

Shh, I'm agitating.

It's a moral responsibility. This country allowed you to make money now you should do ur best to make the country better.

nippon_gamer

If it's moral, why should it be required? Why can't it be "If you want to give your hard-earned money to the needy, go ahead--it's your choice"?

[QUOTE="lazzordude"]whats wrong with keeping what you make?Dark__Link

Nothing. A truth most of these people would accept if they actually had any significant wealth to their name.

i have to pay 23,000 dollars to go to school a year. Do you know why? cause my family makes more than 35,000. The fed gov doesn't have enough money to help me pay for my education and i might end up dropping out cause i cant pay for it. Is this my fault? couldn't the rich be taxed more so i can have an opportunity to become educated? or is it my fault for not making enough money.