the tax argument

I'm starting a new thread for this here cause I'd like to continue the discussion, but I think we trashed Chaos' thread enough.

Well in the UK we have tax brackets..Didnt know you guys didnt.

Personally I believe becoming rich is dependent upon your drive to become rich. Some of the guys that have become rich dont have particular skills, just drive. For me, there is no way I can comprehend working for someone else, making them richer, when I could be that guy. I have seen it happen with my mum, and the rest of my family. Its not a good thing.

Being rich, I believe is about desire. Not for one second am I saying the poor are lazy however. I know you can work excessively hard and be poor, like my grandpa, worked his *** off his whole life and is just poor as ****, but I dont know a harder working man.

Its very easy to criticise the rich, and say they have a lot of money so must be greedy. But if you think about it, in some ways, its the opposite, its only thru creating jobs for people etc, that they have actually made their money.

If you want to criticise someone it should definately be the government. And its not for allowing a tax break to the rich. Its for allowing one to the poor for being in debt. As, imo, the educational system is a joke, money management is not taught, so millions of people come out of education expected to know wtf to do with their money. They dont. Hence large amounts of debt, which some naively perceive to be ok because they get a tax break.


Quote:
but the rich will only do enough for the comunity to create a better public image

but at least they can put it into programs they want to see flourish.

To me, those two statements appear to be contradictory. You are saying they only do good things to gain a good public image, yet are putting money into charitable organisations that they would genuinely like to see flourish?

Ripper I dont know what you genuinely believe about the rich. You say you dont get rich soley by wanting to be, or we all would...So by definition, you must want to be rich? Yet at the same time, you have the constant implication the rich help themselves and help no-one else. And if they do, it must only be to help their public image. Either you dont believe those statements and must truely want to be rich, or actually, you do believe those statements (which would be my guess that you do) and hence you dont actually want to be rich, as to you it is a negative thing, and hence, arent.

You then mention people dont choose to be poor. Sure, some just get hard luck. Born into a family that cant get them a good education, dont get educated, maybe have a kid, whatever, I agree, they are not choosing to be poor.. But many choose to be poor thru their actions, by buying things they dont need, because of the consumerist society we live in. By working for someone else. Etc. Thats fine, some people want job security, and their belief is that that comes by being an employee. But that is what they are chosing.

I think it is harder for some to become rich than others, no doubt, and some it is virtually impossible for. But many of us have a choice as to what we chase, a promotion or a client, a new car, house and wardrobe or an apartment block. We make our choices. The rich for the most part have chosen different to those of the poor.

To me, being rich doesnt mean to be greedy. But I get the impression to you it does.

To me, the rich are more valuable to the government than the poor. And so they should try to keep the rich rich. To you they are not, as they are greedy.

To me, the educational system is the reason many people are poor - because they arent educated about the right things. To you, people are poor because they have not been in the educational system.

We have different views on this, and these views will probably form the choices we make. That doesnt make either of us more greedy than the other, or a better or worse person. Just as an atheist is no better or worse than any theist, they just have different views, that will form the choices they make.

First off... I want to address the quotes you took from my argument. They may be contradictory statements side by side, but they have been taken out of their respective contexts.

The first is a direct statement, but the second is dependant on the government basically “forcing” the rich to be generous towards programs as an alternative to giving it to the government. Also, we do have tax brackets here, with the wealthiest receiving the most breaks.

You are right… in general, I do think that most of rich are greedy. But, if you look at the numbers, I can also KNOW that many of them are. When the gap between the rich and the poor is becoming wider and wider, it means the rich are acquiring more of the wealth, and the poor are acquiring less. What do we call someone who has enough, but keeps taking and taking, even though it’s at the expense of others?

According to Forbes Magazine, the number of billionaires has risen from 476 to 793 in the past three years. Yet more and more people are becoming impoverished. With all these great wealthy philanthropists, why are more and more jobs being outsourced to countries where workers can be bought for wages so feeble, they may as just as well call them slaves. Why are there sweatshops? Thousands of jobs in the U.S. have been lost because rich business owners don’t want to cut into their dividends by paying workers what they are worth. I’m sure the same is happening in the U.K.

I agree that a big problem is education, but education won’t improve unless there is funding. Funding comes from taxes. The best way for the government to receive more money from taxes is through income tax and spending. So if you think the rich shouldn’t be taxed, the rest of the income tax burden will be left to the lower classes… but the lower classes wages aren’t increasing to keep up with inflation because the businesses don’t want to loose money by paying their employees more (even thought hey are charging more for their products,) so the government is loosing money over time because they aren’t getting what they need from the income tax. Also, because the lower classes aren’t making enough money to purchase more products, less money is gained through sales tax. So… all this money is being filtered away from a taxable foundation and is being put into tax sheltered wealth.

About your line of psychoanalysis about how I’m not rich because I don’t like rich people… I would love to be wealthy! You make it seem like I think the rich are a particular type of people, all with the same traits… as if I said they were all blond. I would love to have money, but I know what I would do with the money if I were a billionaire. In fact, I would never become a billionaire. If I owned a company, like…. say… Walmart, I wouldn’t continue to make more and more money. The more profits my company would make, I would put back into the company and it’s workers. That’s why Walmart pisses me off so much today, cause Sam Walton had it right when he created the store to sell moderately priced products that were made by legitimate manufacturing companies in this country. Since he has died, the idea has been lost and his family has reaped rewards through shipping the manufacturing jobs overseas, where wages aren’t regulated and workers are paid less than $2 per day.

Bottom line… it doesn’t matter what I or anyone else thinks about the rich. The more the wealth of the community is taken away from the community, the more the community suffers. When the richest 1 percent of adults owned 40 percent of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10 percent of adults accounted for 85 percent of the world's total, that doesn’t leave enough for the rest.

Think about it. 90% of the world’s population has to divide up 15% of the world’s wealth. This doesn't happen without greed.

First of all, UGH!!!!
The level of this discussion is very high, but i think i will try to participate in the next couple of days if it is okay.
Very interesting topic....

[titansrule]

To me, even in context, the two statements are contradictory. How do you mean, "forcing"? They are encouraging charitable donations, I dont see how that can be a bad thing.

In regards the rich being greedy, to me, they are no more greedy than 98% of us. Probably even higher. Bar those people who give their lives solely to charity, working abroad for next to nothing to make a difference, comparitively, we are all greedy s***s.

It is our greed that has made the rich, rich. We want the latest and greatest products, the newest clothes, the most advanced technology. All the rich do, again, those who have made themselves rich, is provide us with those services, clothes, and new technologies.

So in fact, it is only by the rich providing these things, that they initially gain their money. They are gaining a lot of money by doing so, but the point is, they are only doing it, fundamentally, by providing not taking. The exact opposite of the poor.

This is why the gap between the rich and the poor is growing. The poor and middle class are making it grow, not the rich, they are providing what we want. If we werent so greedy in wanting all these things, the rich would not be rich, and the gap would not be growing. It is not the rich greed that is increasing the gap, it is the greed of the poor and middle class.

Education is a huge problem, and is the reason many are poor. They are not taught the right things. They dont need more funding, they just need to change their priorities. I dont personally understand how circle theorems are more important than how to successfully avoid bad debts. Or how Shakespeare is more important than choosing a career path. Or how Fe 2+ when mixed with H2O = X is more important than deciding on a retirement plan.

Another reason the educational system is flawed is that it actively encourages not to make mistakes, and when you do, they are bad things. In fact, mistakes are how we learn. You make them, you learn from them. Thats not what you are taught, you make mistakes and you are kept in at lunch, or get a detention, whatever. This then shapes peoples lives. Imagine if when learning to ride a bike your dad had said to you, "If you fall, Ill beat you", you never would have taken your stabilisers off, and thus never learned to ride a bike.. This issue is harder to tackle, but the one about finance is not. It should be a subject in school, simple as that. And it should be considered more important than any of the others, because it is. If you want to criticise the government, criticise them for that.

You might love to be wealthy, but are you actively pursuing it? Those who become rich have strong desire and commitment, backed up with knowledge in their area of business, and a knowledge of how to use their money in order to have it work for them - and they go out and they do it. You may well like to be wealthy, but my guess is you arent going out and doing it, which there is nothing wrong with at all.

Interestingly, you say I speak about them as though they are all blonde, not only do you do the same (claiming the majority are greedy) but the majority are the same. They did tests for a programme with a title something along the lines of "Mind Of A Millionaire"..It entailed members of the public carrying out mini tests along with Multi Millionaires, and pyschologists analysed them. The millionaires all came back with very similar results, some were considred "stronger" entrepeneurial spirits than the others, Dancan Bannatyne for example was high, but they were all very very similar. Just thought that was interesting.

Think about it. 90% of the world’s population has to divide up 15% of the world’s wealth. This doesn't happen without greed.

Nope, it doesnt. And that greed is equally attributable to the poor and middle class. The rich get the brunt of it as they have come out on top.

You said it yourself, greed is human nature. So dont for one second think that it is a trait of the rich and not the other classes. As then, you would undeniably be contradicting yourself, direct or indirect statement

[Tigam]

Originally Posted by titansrule

It is our greed that has made the rich, rich. We want the latest and greatest products, the newest clothes, the most advanced technology. All the rich do, again, those who have made themselves rich, is provide us with those services, clothes, and new technologies.

It's more like the society does that, not the "rich"

The Rich are only rich because the poor make them so.

So in fact, it is only by the rich providing these things, that they initially gain their money. They are gaining a lot of money by doing so, but the point is, they are only doing it, fundamentally, by providing not taking. The exact opposite of the poor.

Uhh... The poor take? Yeah, lets go back to the society thing. The poor barter with money, which makes the rich what they are. I get what you are saying, but man was that a horrible way of going about saying it.

This is why the gap between the rich and the poor is growing. The poor and middle class are making it grow, not the rich, they are providing what we want. If we werent so greedy in wanting all these things, the rich would not be rich, and the gap would not be growing. It is not the rich greed that is increasing the gap, it is the greed of the poor and middle class.

I think it has more to do with overseas "mining" of human resources. Which is pretty much what Ripper is saying in a nutshell.

Education is a huge problem, and is the reason many are poor. They are not taught the right things. They dont need more funding, they just need to change their priorities. I dont personally understand how circle theorems are more important than how to successfully avoid bad debts. Or how Shakespeare is more important than choosing a career path. Or how Fe 2+ when mixed with H2O = X is more important than deciding on a retirement plan.

It's exercises in critical thinking.

Nope, it doesnt. And that greed is equally attributable to the poor and middle class. The rich get the brunt of it as they have come out on top.

You said it yourself, greed is human nature. So dont for one second think that it is a trait of the rich and not the other classes. As then, you would undeniably be contradicting yourself, direct or indirect statement

I agree with the human nature thing.


But one thing... Do you agree or disagree... The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

The reason I put the quotes around forcing, is because yes… it is “encouraging charitable donations.” And yes, charitable donations aren’t a bad thing. The difference being that the donations would be happening if it didn’t mean that they would get a tax write off. Am I saying that every charitable act is done just to get a tax write off? Of coarse not, but the write off can be used to “urge” the rich to do something good with their money.

And yes… I agree with your point that we are all greedy. It sickens me, to a certain point. But, there are different levels of greed. There is the kind of greed where I want to own a Nintendo Wii really badly, and then there is the type of greed that allows a business owner to acquire over $1,000,000,000 in wealth. If you took away three of those zeros, a person could still support their family, own just about everything they could ever ask for, and still never have to work. The top 25 on Forbes wealthiest list are each worth over $13,000,000,000.

So, how did they get that rich? Well, if you do some research, you will find skeletons in most if not all of their closets. Take Ingvar Kamprad for example. I chose him cause he is the owner of Ikea, a store I actually kind of like, he is worth 28.0 Billion dollars, and I think I’ve picked on the Walton kids enough. Since 1994 to 2005, Ikea’s revenue has grown from $4.3b to 19.4b, more than 400% growth. Ikea has always bolstered a code of conduct for their employment practices. Well how about that.

In 2003 the Dutch trade union federation asked the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (Somo) to investigate Ikea suppliers in three countries: India, Bulgaria and Vietnam. In each case investigators met workers from three or four companies and conducted interviews outside the workplace. They visited the factories and talked to the management.

Their conclusions concerned 10 suppliers representing about 2,000 employees, noting in the final report: "There are still numerous violations of Ikea's code of conduct in all three countries in all factories researched." The most common concerned freedom of association and collective bargaining for wages and overtime. In the worst case there was no trade union, employees worked a seven-day week and the minimum wage was not honored. No one was "aware" of Ikea's code of conduct.

When interviewed, 9-year-old textile worker “Shiva” from India said she made 2,300 rupees ($48.30) per month at an Ikea subcontractor. You might say, “well, what is the dollar worth there?” In comparison, it costs her 500 rupees ($10.50) per month to take the bus to work. Does this sound like the fair wages?

So… if this rich dick is so good for his country and his people, why doesn’t he have any factories in Sweden? Since he doesn’t, he isn’t putting money back into his country, cause he doesn’t have workers paying income taxes. He doesn’t have to pay workers minimum wages, because he employs workers that live in countries that don’t care about the workers. Sure… you can say it’s the fault of the governments for not taking care of their citizens, but Ingvar could also pay them more, instead of continually receiving growing profits.

So who is “making” who here? The poor are making the wealthy rich by buying their products, but the rich are making the lower classes poorer because they aren’t paying them what they should for the work they do to make the products. Which is the greater evil?

On the subject of education… in order to reform the education system, you would need to purchase new books, educate new teachers, and pay teachers better wages so you can convert more of the intelligent invigorated business men and women into teachers. All of this costs money. I would point you back to my previous argument on how the government gets funding for education. Since it isn’t in this forum, I’ll summarize with this…You propose that the wealthy shouldn’t be taxed. The wealthy owns 85% of the funds in circulation. Where is the government supposed to find the money to reform the education system when they are pulling taxes from only 15% of the wealth?

Titans, I’m actually enjoying this argument, as it’s making me do research into my own beliefs, but I don’t want to continue it at the expense of our friendship. If I really start to piss you off, let me know and we can drop it. I want to end this with a question… is your argument founded on your own personal beliefs or what you learned in school? A bit of both?