• I agree with your points CC, and would like to revise my previous statement. I have nothing against giving to charities, etc., what I’m against is large inheritances. Passing money down to your children is one thing, but insuring that they never have to find out what working is like is another thing. I just want the playing field leveled out a little.


  • I like taxing heritages. I mean, you can easily make the first 500,000 bucks tax free, and then tax the hell out of the amount above that.
    Charities, who are exempt from taxes, should be exempt from that too. But anyone who has to tax his income should have to pay for that too.
    And i don’t think that you can be stupid enough to lose everything once your money has reached a certain threshold.

    I am not against the “rich” (unfortunately, the about half of USies seem to think they belong to the top or will soon be there… not noticing how rich you really have to be there, but still they go spastic as soon as soon as someone targets those on the very top), i am against the superrich. If you earn 10 - 100 millions a year, then you come close to the superrich. And they should just take up the responsibility these enormous riches give to them for the society.


  • @F_alk:

    I am not against the “rich” , i am against the superrich.If you earn 10 - 100 millions a year, then you come close to the superrich. And they should just take up the responsibility these enormous riches give to them for the society

    10-100 million? I would say that makes you superrich. I question whether anyone who makes that much possibly deserves it. I also believe that people who have that kind of money should do something for society, but they’re the ones who made it and I’m not going to go harass them to give it all away.


  • @Grigoriy:

    @F_alk:

    I am not against the “rich” , i am against the superrich.If you earn 10 - 100 millions a year, then you come close to the superrich. And they should just take up the responsibility these enormous riches give to them for the society

    10-100 million? I would say that makes you superrich. I question whether anyone who makes that much possibly deserves it. I also believe that people who have that kind of money should do something for society, but they’re the ones who made it and I’m not going to go harass them to give it all away.

    Unless it’s to the government when they die, right? :(

    What a bunch of crap. You single out the so-called “superrich” people and claim it’s okay to do so becuase they have so much money they probably didn’t earn it. Ironically, nobody says anything about this. Now, what if I was to single out the so-called “superpoor” people and tell them that they had to pay taxes too? All hell would break loose. I’d be labeled as “uncompassionate”, “heartless”, and “greedy.”

    It basically comes down to the point of who the hell do you think you are, trying to take what belongs to me? The only reason you’re not labelled a thief is because you’re trying to steal the money by use of the government. :-?

    Why are you more concerned about what individuals are making rather than what the government is making? :o You’re worried about making a crapload of money that you don’t deserve, well…does the government deserve it? Of course they do…some of it. But, they’ll take whatever you give them, and once they’ve satisfied the needs of the basic neccessities (defense, judicial, etc.) then they’ll waste it on needless social programs. :roll:


  • im against people who inherit enough money that they never work as well, but you cant really do anything to stop it without being grossly unfair. I think what should happen is, you dont get the inheritance until an older age, so that you have to hold a job for so long, or you have to hold a job for x number of years to get the inheritance. this way, the govt does not take your money unfairly, but you have done something to deserve it.


  • @Janus1:

    im against people who inherit enough money that they never work as well, but you cant really do anything to stop it without being grossly unfair. I think what should happen is, you dont get the inheritance until an older age, so that you have to hold a job for so long, or you have to hold a job for x number of years to get the inheritance. this way, the govt does not take your money unfairly, but you have done something to deserve it.

    None of your business.
    i have to agree with D:S to some degree here. Why does anyone care that someone else inherits a ton of cash that they didn’t work for/earn. Same thing with the lottery. I worry about me in this regard. I don’t take money i didn’t earn (although i will borrow from my parents until i’m done school). If some jerk down the street inherits a BILLION dollars - that’s none of my business, its not my problem, and lucky for him. So what if he doesn’t improve his work ethic - not my problem. Should i care that he doesn’t have to work anymore? Not at all. Hopefully the schmuck will spend lots of money - keep the economy running, but inheriting it from his parents - not my problem.


  • nope. i have to disagree with you on this CC. people like that are a waste of humanity. they serve no purpose, and are no help to anybody. obviously, i cant make them work before they get their inheritance, and i dont know if the govt could either. but i think it should. otherwise, they are just wasted lives. their money would serve a better purpose in the hands of someone else, be it a charity, the govt, or someone/thing else. not my place to decide who, im no economist.


  • …does the government deserve it? Of course they do…some of it. But, they’ll take whatever you give them, and once they’ve satisfied the needs of the basic neccessities (defense, judicial, etc.) then they’ll waste it on needless social programs.

    Sometimes they waste it even before they satisfy the basic necessities.
    That’s what we need, to eliminate govt. waste. I could do that, I’m the cheapest person I know. :P

    As far as the rich people, I guess you’re right. Who cares?


  • @Deviant:Scripter:

    You have a brain, why don’t you use it?

    Oh, and yes, you should never call yourself christian at any times. Look who JC dined with…prostitutes and tax-agents.

    For taking away what is mine… it is ok to be taken away though, when i start to use my money against the state (see what happened to the money of Al-Quaeda)… but, only if i use it in an openly agressive way. If i use it against something after having founded some company, it suddenly all turns business and freedom of business and trade and stuff. I mean if i start a business and get as many subsidies (correct word?) that is ok then, right? And don’t tell me that the US economy doesn’t have any subventions granted… well, you can, but you can tell “lies into your own pocket” on my behalf.


  • is guest Falk?


  • That guest has never posted as a registered user… from that IP


  • @Anonymous:

    Oh, and yes, you should never call yourself christian at any times. Look who JC dined with…prostitutes and tax-agents.

    Why not? If you believe in something, there’s nothing wrong with telling people IMO, unless you then proceed to attempt to get them to believe the same thing.


  • The guest has been me. Again my apologies. For the IP… Uni network :)

    To the calligng oneself christian: GI, you said something along the line of “believe”. But then, if i believe christianity to be about worshipping Satan and defying JC, would i still eligible to call myself christian?
    Who can someone who agrees with any kind of violence call him/herself christian? non-violence is one of the most important parts of christianity. Another important part is feeling for and helping the poor and what-so-ever-challenged, not the healthy and wealthy.


  • @F_alk:

    To the calligng oneself christian: GI, you said something along the line of “believe”. But then, if i believe christianity to be about worshipping Satan and defying JC, would i still eligible to call myself christian?
    Who can someone who agrees with any kind of violence call him/herself christian? non-violence is one of the most important parts of christianity. Another important part is feeling for and helping the poor and what-so-ever-challenged, not the healthy and wealthy.

    First of all, I may have missed it, but I haven’t seen any references to christianity up until your post about not calling someone christian.

    Wrt sentence two, no, because there are a specific set of beliefs involved with christianity.

    “Helping the poor and challenged” yes, but like I said, the burden for that rests upon the individual, and it’s their decision.


  • Still not sure why any of this has anything to say about why the money i earn should not be given after i die to my children. Of course, I might well just give it to my children before i pass with the proviso that they take care of me through the last few years of my life.
    Janus - you really should have no say in the matter. Look after yourself, and others if you are looking to help them. Otherwise, none of your business.


  • O, i absolutely have no say. and despite my fiercest protests, it will likely never change in my lifetime. however, i can still argue against it until i die.


  • Gi, let"s skip that, it was not meant by me to create a new thread in this thread, just one of my “usual” lashings at stereotypical USie-traits.

    CC, as you don’t like taxing heritages, then surely the children of composers and writers should not get a drop of the royalities once the creative parent dies.


  • One owns the royalties on a published material. The ownership of the material simply passes on to the child like other property.


  • Well, but they have done no work at all for that. Why should someone earn something for nothing? That is very bad for econmy, it contradicts the very basics of that (which is “you only get something when you give something”).
    Why should these people get something for nothing, but on the other hand many here feel very well when bashing any social security system.


  • @F_alk:

    Well, but they have done no work at all for that. Why should someone earn something for nothing? That is very bad for econmy, it contradicts the very basics of that (which is “you only get something when you give something”).
    Why should these people get something for nothing, but on the other hand many here feel very well when bashing any social security system.

    again - the rights of the property/equity holder i think should surpass your desire to see everyone “earn” their inheritance.
    Gov’t is everyone’s business. Lennon’s progeny is Lennon’s business.
    I don’t give a s**t if he does nothing but pick his nose and gets 1 billion$ from daddy in equity. Not my problem. The crypt looks after the crypt, and people who needs the crypt’s help. Your societal benefit at the risk of your parent’s autonomy is nothing that i need to pay attention to.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 29
  • 14
  • 12
  • 65
  • 41
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

35

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts