So why do (especially AT P&N) socialists think it's ok to take from those who rightfully earned?

[hellokeith]

This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

 

[Steeplerot]

I think you should try wiki on what socialism is, try laying off the conservapedia.

1. Never heard of someone have a problem with law-abiding profit generation, but unfettered capitalism works out to anything but this seeing as how a few will sooner or later consolidate and unfairly take control of others efforts and labor. The biggest problem with capitalism.
2. This is a strawman, one started by reagan, of "welfare queens looking for handouts" is one of the biggest jokes about the conservative mindset as it is based on total bullshit from a man in the depths of alzheimers.
3. That is called corruption, and is part of any economic philosophy where humans happen to be taking part.

 

[UberNeuman]

methinks, OP, you take the easy way out and make far too many assumptions....

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

I think it would be helpful in your quest to come to a better understanding (hah!) if you dispensed with that ridiculous conservative myth of the self-made man. If you look at demographics, they don't change very much from generation to generation. Most middle and upper class people were born into that, they had a HUGE advantage to begin with. And most people not doing so great were born into that kind of situation too. This theory that everyone starts out equal and only the people in #1 do well is pretty appealing to a lot of people, but it's bullshit. That isn't to say that there aren't exceptions, but they are very much not the rule.

Now the rest of what you said is also hip-deep bullshit...but let's start with what I just said. Your characterization of the "two groups" is silly ego-stroking. Which is great, but not real helpful.

 

[jackschmittusa]

When the rich get to keep ALL of the money, you quickly get a 3rd world country.

All 1st world countries have social systems funded by the government.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

I am not at all a socialist, but your argument is fallacious.

You can't assume that the amount of money made has much to do with how hard someone works. How do you determine how much someone works? Calories burned? Physical exertion? If that were the case, then some of the poorest people in the country are the ones who have worked the hardest.

 

[LegendKiller]

I really have a question for those who say that higher wage earners shouldn't pay higher taxes. How much do you make?

How much do you make keith? Not that I expect you to answer.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

Hopefully it will bother you enough to leave at some point soon.

End of whining.

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
I think you should try wiki on what socialism is, try laying off the conservapedia.

1. Never heard of someone have a problem with law-abiding profit generation, but unfettered capitalism works out to anything but this seeing as how a few will sooner or later consolidate and unfairly take control of others efforts and labor. The biggest problem with capitalism.
2. This is a strawman, one started by reagan, of "welfare queens looking for handouts" is one of the biggest jokes about the conservative mindset as it is based on total bullshit from a man in the depths of alzheimers.
3. That is called corruption, and is part of any economic philosophy where humans happen to be taking part.

1. Yes; it's called ownership of the company.
3. Bullshit. Welfare is handouts.
3. Good; I see you won't be voting Dem as Hillary's plan to take from us on behalf of the common good is corrupt.
4. Welcome back; theres a few Chavez threads around that need your input.

 

[techs]

I was just thinking how much money Bill Gates would have made if he was born in Guatemala?
Not much.
So I guess its safe to say that it was living in the US with its roads, schools, military, etc that allowed Bill the opportunity to make all that money. So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.
Lets see. Bill Gates in Guatamala would have about 100 dollars and in the US he has 60 billion dollars. Therefore Gates made almost 60 billion dollars because of America. How much in taxes should he pay?

 

[StageLeft]

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

Taxation is par tof life, it's inevitible to the point of being cliche'. That said, where are the lines for taxation drawn? How much is too much, or not enough? You have no idea what it takes to keep a country as dynamic as ours in terms of money, you're simply whining about noe being able to keep every red cent you earn from the country that allowed you to earn it. You're greedy and irrational, and you won't be anything else until you reconcile your place in maintaining this country or you come up with a better plan that ensures our basic liberties remain accessible to every man woman in child while further enriching your materialstic tendencies.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

Taxation is par tof life, it's inevitible to the point of being cliche'. That said, where are the lines for taxation drawn? How much is too much, or not enough? You have no idea what it takes to keep a country as dynamic as ours in terms of money, you're simply whining about noe being able to keep every red cent you earn from the country that allowed you to earn it. You're greedy and irrational, and you won't be anything else until you reconcile your place in maintaining this country or you come up with a better plan that ensures our basic liberties remain accessible to every man woman in child while further enriching your materialstic tendencies.

I'm not sure who you're addressing

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

Yet you ignore my premise. Bill Gates would have made nothing in Guatemala. Yet he has 60 billion in the US. How much does he owe the US?
And if you agree its ok to have taxed Gates for billions then you obviously disagree with the op. Since clearly for you its a matter of how much the rich should pay in proportion, not that the op's point the rich shouldn't pay any more than anyone else.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider


I'm not sure who you're addressing

haha, yeah that was sort of uncear. I started out piggy-backing what you were saying then started throwing around "you" and "you're" loosely. Got myself all riled up mid paragraph and lost focus :laugh:

Anyhow, criticism was aimed at the OP of all people. How about I get rid of the quotes, that'll help.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

That's it exactly. I rarely hear truly wealthy people whining about taxes. It's the wealthy wanna-bes who've been duped into believing they would be wealthy too if only they didn't have to pay so many taxes. Taxes become their scapegoat for their own failure to live up to their greedy fantasies. They can't grasp -- or at least refuse to accept -- that significant taxes are necessary to build and maintain the extraordinary physical, financial, and educational infrastructure that gives people like Gates and Buffet the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.

What are the rules?

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

That's it exactly. I rarely hear truly wealthy people whining about taxes. It's the wealthy wanna-bes who've been duped into believing they would be wealthy too if only they didn't have to pay so many taxes. Taxes become their scapegoat for their own failure to live up to their greedy fantasies. They can't grasp -- or at least refuse to accept -- that significant taxes are necessary to build and maintain the extraordinary physical, financial, and educational infrastructure that gives people like Gates and Buffet the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy.

w3rd

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Bill isn't really a good one to pick on. He and Warren Buffet have given billions to charity and THEY wouldn't mind higher taxes even after that. Warren Buffet the Socialist? That's like Bush the uber general. Not bloody likely.

What do I personally want from the rich? Nothing. I know some wealthy people. More people whine about their taxes than they do themselves.

That's it exactly. I rarely hear truly wealthy people whining about taxes. It's the wealthy wanna-bes who've been duped into believing they would be wealthy too if only they didn't have to pay so many taxes. Taxes become their scapegoat for their own failure to live up to their greedy fantasies. They can't grasp -- or at least refuse to accept -- that significant taxes are necessary to build and maintain the extraordinary physical, financial, and educational infrastructure that gives people like Gates and Buffet the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy.

I've read what those two have said about taxation, and I think I can fairly sum it up with "WTF? Why are people crying for us?'

Gates and Buffet know they could move to some third world country where their money would be worth even more. They don't because they don't want to live in a shithole, to be blunt.

Here's another way to look at it. If people who haven't enough money to buy a computer were able to afford one, chances are it would have a Windows OS. The more sold, the more Gates earns. This is a consumer driven economy. If people who need things are able to buy them, then they will. It's they who move money. Someone selling won't make a dime if no one is buying.

There also seems to be this impression that money is going to be handed out in welfare checks. Well we all hear about how we need to keep the military funded. Hell, why not fund the police as well? Many communities haven't the required manpower and haven't the tax base to raise money. Look at Philly. Their looking for people to walk the streets as unarmed volunteers because they havent the financial resources. Get the crack dealers off the street. Give people a real shot at an education. "Work hard and you'll get rich" is bullshit for a lot of kids. Work hard means spending their lives at carwashes. Oops, that's automated now. No work for you! Well get a college degree! Eat cake!


I see the welfare system and a bunch of slugs who don't want to earn an honest dime. On the other hand I've see more who would do more if given a REAL chance instead of a pat on the back and an "endeavor to persevere" speech.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So all the US wants is its fair share from Bill.

He has paid billions in taxes here, both personally and from his company and those it employs.

You people begging from the rich to give you more--what do you give to the poor? You have luxury items--so how much do you give back to charities? You ask wealthier people than you to give back, so what are you doing? How much time you are spending in soup kitchens and Christmas present runs to poor people? Your hypocrisy can be distilled down to the simple idea that you want to steal from those higher up and not have those from below you steal from you.

Yet you ignore my premise. Bill Gates would have made nothing in Guatemala. Yet he has 60 billion in the US. How much does he owe the US?
And if you agree its ok to have taxed Gates for billions then you obviously disagree with the op. Since clearly for you its a matter of how much the rich should pay in proportion, not that the op's point the rich shouldn't pay any more than anyone else.

From the perspective of fairness, they should not pay more. They should pay $10k/year or whatever like the rest of us. Of course, our society would crumble immediate, so this is more an academic argument and has no real bearing to reality.

In guatemala bill would have made less, but then everyone would have and he still may have been at the top (living in a nice hut instead of a shanty).

Bill has given back to this country with many products that millions of people rely on and thousands of jobs.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

This is easy.

Because they are jealous of people who make more money than they do. They then rationalize this by making claims that they are the ultimate authority of what is acceptable for any job position.

The problems are they fail to realize that the majority of people who earn large amounts of money worked hard to get where they are. There is no such thing as luck, if you want more luck with making money you have to spend more of your time trying to make money.

Life isn't fair. They just refuse to accept it so they vilify those who are better than they are.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
Life isn't fair.

E.g. make more money = pay more taxes.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

This is easy.

Because they are jealous of people who make more money than they do. They then rationalize this by making claims that they are the ultimate authority of what is acceptable for any job position.

The problems are they fail to realize that the majority of people who earn large amounts of money worked hard to get where they are. There is no such thing as luck, if you want more luck with making money you have to spend more of your time trying to make money.

Life isn't fair. They just refuse to accept it so they vilify those who are better than they are.

And of course people who think as you do strangle ferrets in their sleep. How many did you kill last night?

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: hellokeith
This has been bothering me for a while, and I still can't figure out the thought process.

1. Person works hard, plays by the rules, and makes money.
2. Person does not work hard and makes excuses, blames others, waits for handouts.
3. Socialist takes money from #1 and gives to #2, in exchange for continued political/economic power.

How is this not agreed upon by a concensus as ethically wrong? Even illegal?

This is easy.

Because they are jealous of people who make more money than they do. They then rationalize this by making claims that they are the ultimate authority of what is acceptable for any job position.

The problems are they fail to realize that the majority of people who earn large amounts of money worked hard to get where they are. There is no such thing as luck, if you want more luck with making money you have to spend more of your time trying to make money.

Life isn't fair. They just refuse to accept it so they vilify those who are better than they are.

And of course people who think as you do strangle ferrets in their sleep. How many did you kill last night?

it's fascinating how self indulgent the sort of mentality that shiv possesses is. Not only do they bitch and moan about how our government doesn't accomodate their sense of entitelment (and yes, when you question how much you owe the gov that is a perfect example of an etitlement attitude) but then they besmirch everyone else's "inferiority" by claiming the entire world is just "jealous" of them. Talk about a circle jerk, that's mental masturbation if I ever saw it!