Spread The Wealth (Page 5)

In regards to redistribution of wealth:

I honestly think that if you took all of the wealth in America today and spread it evenly amongst the population 80% of the rich would be rich again and 80% of the poor would be poor again.  It's mainly a mindset and choices one makes.

Again, I have no proof of this, it's just my interpretation of what I've seen of people on both sides of that 'gap'.

Yep! That's why I believe a FLAT TAX would be appropriate. You make $20K, you pay 10% income tax of $2K / $200K, you pay $20K. Pay 10% tax on retail, and those moochers will think twice about buying big ticket items, and the hard working who can afford it...well, can afford it. See, it's easy being President

As I've told you before:  Good Man.

Does not matter if you make 20,000 a year or 250,000 they both pay the same taxes on 20,000 a year.

 If I made $250,000 a year I would be happy since sure maybe on that 50k a year I would be paying 35% taxes on it but I would get keep the other about 35k.  That 35k is more than alot of people make in a year and that is just some of the money I am making. 

Actually, I think the question was, why is there such a large gap between the rich and the poor in this country (I'm paraphrasing the original post a little.)

And I don't think we'll come to armed revolt in this country, honestly.  But I think we're already seeing a movement toward people wanting to close that gap in the current election - with all the "protect the middle class" or "grow the middle class" speeches you've heard from both sides.  Obama makes no bones about wanting the richest companies and people to bear the largest burden (yes, even more than they do currently), and McCain says it's better to give those people breaks to grow the economy.  It's the whole "make the smaller slices of pie bigger (at the expense of the big pieces)" vs. the "make the whole pie bigger" argument.  I can't tell you which is right, or which is a better strategy, but I can tell you people seem to be paying a little more attention to the former (which is one reason why I think Senator Obama will win the election next Tuesday).

On a somewhat tangential note, it baffles me that people are getting upset about the whole "redistribution of wealth" comment.  We do it every single day in this country.  WIC, welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, you name it.  That's my wealth (and yours if you pay taxes in this country) being redistributed to other people across the country, who hopefully need it (I know there are people who game the system.)  Obama was either courageous enough (or unfortunate enough) to say it out loud, on camera.  For the record, I don't personally agree with the idea of writing someone an income tax refund check if, at the end of the year, their tax rate is 0%.

Duh.  Spread the wealth to Americans only

For the same reason my brother is on food stamps and I have 4 bikes.  And even if you believe that he does want to 'spread the wealth' he didn't say give everyone $5 and that's it.

Actually, I agree with a lot of that.  There should be some kind of "means test" to determine who really needs the help (money, etc), and who doesn't.  The problem, I think, is that it would be difficult to create the criteria that work all the time.  In your example above, you mentioned being examined by their doctors to determine whether or not they can work.  I like the idea - but who pays for the doctors visit?  The person who, presumably, already can't afford health care?  Or do we create a system in which you visit the doctor, and if he/she finds you unable to work, it's "free", but if they think you can/should work and not get a disability, you pay?  Definitely not trying to make light of this, just trying to say that actually creating a means test would likely be incredibly complicated, and there would always be someone or some group of people upset with the way it was done.  It doesn't mean we shouldn't try though.

And again, I don't favor providing income tax refund money to people who already pay $0 in income tax either.   With regards to the two current presidential candidates, both their tax plans appear to want to decrease the redistribution coming out of my paychecks, just to differing degrees.  I will definitely conceded that Senator Obama wants to increase the burden on a specific segment of the tax base.

Edit:  I fail speeling.

You know what, you cannot take it when you go.  It is all going to DUST, every last stinken cent of it.  Our fancy bikes and clothes, our houses our dvds/flat screen/ipod/fancy vactions, our central heating and air and our flush toliets.

What has always struck me is how people want more and more and more.  More of what?  The poorest and downtroden of Americans still have more luxeries than the pharohs and kings of 2000 years ago.  A homeless person can use a flush toliet and stay warm in the winter (at least in Canada, i assume the same is in America).  I have more technology sitting on my desk than was in the entire world 100 years ago. 

I drive my car home (amazing, 30 km commute, absolutely amazing), I press a button and my garage opens (are you kidding me, wow), my house is warm (and I don't have to go out and chop wood) and I can go to the washroom and my waste is swooshed away (an amazing blessing). 

Now I know I am simplifying it but come on, the pursuit of wealth only results in one thing, the wish to pursue more wealth.

Be happy with the basics, the rest is dust (in truth even the basics are dust).

Anyways.

Keep your hands off MY dust!

Funny, 'keep your hands off my dust', laughing my off. 

Yeah, I don't mean to tell people how to live their life, I just seeing persuing things as being at the root of the problem of people who are forever unsatisfied about their lot in life. 

Ha, but maybe I am the only one with that problem.