this will happen to America

[Ed12111]

Huh? What we have today wouldn't exist in a fair system(which was your question). Human talent isn't distributed that way.

I'll be shocked if you actually answer your question. Going through your posts seems to reveal that answers aren't your thing. The tough guy shtick is easier than a cogent response.

 

[lumberjack4]

Amazing that the ability to make money is so vastly different from any other human ability.

Its not any different at all. I'm not the one asking for the redistribution of human ability. You make the most of what you got instead of complaining and asking for a handout.

 

[lumberjack4]

I'll be shocked if you actually answer your question. Going through your posts seems to reveal that answers aren't your thing. The tough guy shtick is easier than a cogent response.

I'd be surprised if it took 5 years for the cream to rise to the top while the dead weight sink to the bottom.

 

[Ed12111]

Its not any different at all. I'm not the one asking for the redistribution of human ability. You make the most of what you got instead of complaining and asking for a handout.

If it's not any different than by definition the system isn't fair. The distribution is crazily top heavy. It's like arguing that 80% of people are naturally seven feet.

 

[Ed12111]

I'd be surprised if it took 5 years for the cream to rise to the top while the dead weight sink to the bottom.

If you want to put in Baseball terms. What we have is a group of people Hall of famers who bat .800 and then a drop to .300 for All Stars and then a drop down to about .050 for the average major leaguer. I would say that is not a natural distribution of talent.

 

[Ed12111]

Shocking. BigPapaVol is eerily silent when pressed for an actual response.

 

[sjt18]

Huh? What we have today wouldn't exist in a fair system(which was your question). Human talent isn't distributed that way.

A fair system would be one where people had an absolute right to what they earned within the context of the laws that protected all... and could then distribute charitable as they saw fit.

It is inherently UNFAIR for one party to take the earnings of another party against their will to give to a third party. There is nothing charitable, noble, or good about being generous with wealth that does not belong to you.

 

[Ed12111]

A fair system would be one where people had an absolute right to what they earned within the context of the laws that protected all... and could then distribute charitable as they saw fit.

It is inherently UNFAIR for one party to take the earnings of another party against their will to give to a third party. There is nothing charitable, noble, or good about being generous with wealth that does not belong to you.

If you can promise that setup I'll vote for you.

 

[sjt18]

In America, it's to fund the government. The debate should be about what is being funded and finding a way to develop a self-perpetuating tax structure. The ultimate goal would be about ensuring our way of life to the extent that we can.

RIGHT!!!!

Tax policy should NEVER be viewed as a tool to promote or achieve "fairness" or equity. Taxes... like justice... should be "blind" and indirect as the founder's imagined.

For those who didn't know, the income tax and direct taxation were illegal until the early 1900's when progressives took over both parties and the reigns of political power in America.

Up until that time, gov't ran on approximately 7% of GDP and taxed through excises and tariffs.

 

[lumberjack4]

If it's not any different than by definition the system isn't fair. The distribution is crazily top heavy. It's like arguing that 80% of people are naturally seven feet.

What we have is perfectly fair. You're compensated based on your ability. What's not fair is you taking what I did with my ability and giving it to someone else who did not earn it through no fault of their own I'm sure. You're wanting to interject an outside force into an independent well functioning system because you don't like the rules.

The rich get richer because they continue to do the things that make them rich. The poor get poorer because they continue to do the things that make them poor.

 

[Ed12111]

What we have is perfectly fair. You're compensated based on your ability. What's not fair is you taking what I did with my ability and giving it to someone else who did not earn it through no fault of their own I'm sure. You're wanting to interject an outside force into an independent well functioning system because you don't like the rules.

The rich get richer because they continue to do the things that make them rich. The poor get poorer because they continue to do the things that make them poor.

That requires quite the suspension of disbelief. I still haven't heard why the ability to make money is so much different than every other human skill.

 

[sjt18]

If you can promise that setup I'll vote for you.

Why should I believe that when everything you advocate would prevent that? You have vigorously advocated the confiscation of wealth from those who own it so that it can be transferred to those who either can't or won't work for it.

Here's where the real hypocrisy lies Ed. About 20% of Americans profess to be liberals. That 20% possesses about 20% of the nations wealth and income... meaning that 20% has more than enough resources to solve the poverty problems they say they are concerned about without forcing others to help by gov't action. If it were private action and voluntary giving were solicited... I can all but guarantee that the rest of us would pony up to help.

Gov't should NEVER do for the people what they can and should do for themselves. In this case, the gov't should NOT be charitable for us when we are full well capable of doing it for ourselves.

If those who spend their time advocating big gov't in the media and politics would instead turn to asking for contributions and forming charitable enterprises... problems would actually get resolved.

 

[lumberjack4]

That requires quite the suspension of disbelief. I still haven't heard why the ability to make money is so much different than every other human skill.

How is the ability to make money different from the ability to shoot a basketball, catch a football, hit a baseball, play an instrument, sing, dance, play video games, cook, ect? Hint: It's not.

 

[sjt18]

What we have is perfectly fair.

I know what you are trying to say but this isn't true... but it isn't true precisely because the progressive ideals of folks like Ed have created a system that is not fair.

You're compensated based on your ability. What's not fair is you taking what I did with my ability and giving it to someone else who did not earn it through no fault of their own I'm sure. You're wanting to interject an outside force into an independent well functioning system because you don't like the rules.

Here's the problem in your reasoning. They already are taking from your product against your will therefore you are NOT getting compensated according to your ability and effort.

The rich get richer because they continue to do the things that make them rich. The poor get poorer because they continue to do the things that make them poor.

Absolutely true and just another reason that all education in US needs to be privatized. Private businesses respond to market realities far better and faster than bureaucracies like public, one size fits all education.

 

[Ed12111]

How is the ability to make money different from the ability to shoot a basketball, catch a football, hit a baseball, play an instrument, sing, dance, play video games, cook, ect? Hint: It's not.

I know that's the point.

 

[lumberjack4]

I know what you are trying to say but this isn't true... but it isn't true precisely because the progressive ideals of folks like Ed have created a system that is not fair. Here's the problem in your reasoning. They already are taking from your product against your will therefore you are NOT getting compensated according to your ability and effort.

Absolutely true and just another reason that all education in US needs to be privatized. Private businesses respond to market realities far better and faster than bureaucracies like public, one size fits all education.

I was speaking in terms of compensation which is fair. Not confiscation which is blatantly unfair. But yes, we seem to be seeing the same picture on this issue.

 

[sjt18]

That requires quite the suspension of disbelief. I still haven't heard why the ability to make money is so much different than every other human skill.

Are you kidding Ed? You really don't understand how the composite skills of leadership, intelligence, drive, wisdom, etc that make someone good at running a business are different AND more valuable than the ability to remain awake and stock shelves at a quick stop?

 

[hndog609]

If you want to put in Baseball terms. What we have is a group of people Hall of famers who bat .800 and then a drop to .300 for All Stars and then a drop down to about .050 for the average major leaguer. I would say that is not a natural distribution of talent.

The other side of the coin is who is paying for everything though. The latest tax information I'm aware of ('08) has that top 1% paying just over 38% of all income tax. The top 10% are paying 70%. The bottom 50% (all 70 million of them) only paid 2.7%.

I'm really not too interested in getting into the "income inequality" issue as I have yet to hear anyone really be able to quantify it in any useful way but I darn know who is footing the overwhelming amount of the bill.

 

[Ed12111]

The other side of the coin is who is paying for everything though. The latest tax information I'm aware of ('08) has that top 1% paying just over 38% of all income tax. The top 10% are paying 70%. The bottom 50% (all 70 million of them) only paid 2.7%.

I'm really not too interested in getting into the "income inequality" issue as I have yet to hear anyone really be able to quantify it in any useful way but I darn know who is footing the overwhelming amount of the bill.

That would be pretty remarkable if the group without the money was footing the bill.

 

[lumberjack4]

I know that's the point.

Having a natural ability does not guarantee success. How many people wash out in pro sports? They all had the natural ability but were unable to make it. Why are there some with less ability more successful than others with the ability? There is work required on your behalf whether you have the natural ability or not. B*tching because you don't have the rich man gene isn't going to get you anywhere.

 

[sjt18]

That would be pretty remarkable if the group without the money was footing the bill.

He just showed you another absolute proof that using the tax code to resolve income inequity does not work.

I agree with you that concentrated wealth is a problem. Thing is... your ideals and solutions do not resolve the problem and may have made it both worse and entrenched.

 

[sjt18]

Having a natural ability does not guarantee success. How many people wash out in pro sports? They all had the natural ability but were unable to make it. Why are there some with less ability more successful than others with the ability? There is work required on your behalf whether you have the natural ability or not. B*tching because you don't have the rich man gene isn't going to get you anywhere.

It isn't genetic. It is learned behavior that cuts across all demographics and personal make-ups.

But the common denominators seem to be a refusal to give up and a strong sense of self-reliance.

 

[Ed12111]

Are you kidding Ed? You really don't understand how the composite skills of leadership, intelligence, drive, wisdom, etc that make someone good at running a business are different AND more valuable than the ability to remain awake and stock shelves at a quick stop?

You don't get it. If money making were a talent(it's probably intelligence hard work and likability and some other things) then some would be more talented than others. Just like some are more intelligent than others and some can play basketball or the piano better than others. But if the system we are in was fair(the way some people claim) the distribution of wealth would be similar to the distribution of SAT scores, batting average, or height. That is so far from the case. Therefore, the case must be made that either the ability to make money is completely different than any other human ability, or the system is indeed not fair. One of these is more likely than the other.

 

[hndog609]

That would be pretty remarkable if the group without the money was footing the bill.

If you look at that juuuust right it's actually kinda funny.

45% of the income accounts for 70% of federal income tax revenue. Wax poetic all you want about inequalities of income but don't pretend that those making money aren't paying it and that a whole lot of people either put in little to nothing or are outright red ink.

 

[Ed12111]

If you look at that juuuust right it's actually kinda funny.

45% of the income accounts for 70% of federal income tax revenue. Wax poetic all you want about inequalities of income but don't pretend that those making money aren't paying it and that a whole lot of people either put in little to nothing or are outright red ink.

That's a progressive tax for ya. Of course, the value of the money is incredibly less for the wealthy, so if you had a flat tax it would be disproportionately rough on the poor. That's why Adam Smith saw the need for a progressive tax code hundreds of years ago.