Man, I wish the poor would stop whining...Follow

One person taking wealth from another person in an amount disproportionate to the amount of work exchanged for that wealth.

I aspire to exploit others for my own monetary gain someday, mostly while feeling badly about it.

Nexa

mostly while feeling badly about it.

It passes, I find.

Make more money than someone who works harder than I do by working the system.

Nexa

...You've confused me now...I wasn't kidding. As for the rest of your statement, I agree.

Nexa

Oh, I hadn't read it, but I see what you mean. I don't have time to read his crap on here *and* listen to him too. Also, you quoted me and not him, silly girl.

Nexa

Edited, Apr 9th 2008 3:50pm by Nexa

I meant to quote you... Oh, nevermind. It wasn't that funny anyway.

As of now that is true, but the trend is showing that fewer and fewer "rich" people are getting it from inheritance. That means that soon Mr. and Ms. Richy Rich are gonna have to get off their inflated behinds and earn it like the rest of us poor shlubs.

I believe it's true that a lot of wealth comes from exploitation. I believe that exploitation comes more from corporations than individuals. A lot of people who run corporations prescribe to Milton Friedman's way of thinking. In an article in the a September 1970 edition of the New York Times, he states that basically the social responsibility of a corporation is to maximize profits. He doesn't believe that Corporations should give to social causes because "...the corporate executive would be spending someone else's money (the stockholders, which are the true owners of a corporation) for a general social interest".

My problem with this school of thinking is that people like Friedman want to give corporations the same rights as an individual, but none of the responsibilities we all share as a race.

How does this factor into the post? I don't believe in redistrobution of wealth per se, but I do believe businesses and corporations have a responsibility to give to social causes and back to the communities in which they inhabit.

This is all from a business prospective. The individual aspect is different. I believe is somewhat of a "flat tax per bracket". There should be brackets where everyone in that bracket pays a certain percentage of their income, no exceptions. The percentage of taxes paid should be stepped up as the income brackets increase. Now some are gonna argue that this isn't fair to the people in the upper income bracket. My response to that is the people in the upper income brackets benefit more from societies work as a whole, hence the greater contribution back to society. Now I don't believe the percentage increases should be huge. As the income brackets go up and the tax percentages increase, those more wealthy than the bracket below them would still have more disposable income. Some people might claim this to be unfair, but it balances out (to a degree) in the end because people in the lower income brackets are more likely to use government social programs than those in the upper brackets.

I could expand on these ideas more but I have to get started on my homework now. Yay American Lit!

Chris

Seriously, though, I don't see how anyone could argue that the majority of people living in wealth haven't used exploitation to further themselves. Everyone knows that good, honest work doesn't pay that well.

(Don't have much time at the moment so I will just touch on this for now.)


I may have missed where I have said it. But I had thought I was just arguing against the statement that all (or almost all) of the rich because they exploit others. Again, I am not saying that no rich people have exploited others. I am just saying that it is wrong buy into those beliefs that all rich people are bad and don't deserve their money.

Not sure why I would waste the time keeping this going though.. Guess it's just entertaining.

Ahh, so the three college level economic classes I've taken over the past nine months must all be wrong then? Unless you have a PhD in economics, I'm pretty sure the professors and those who wrote the text books we use know a slight bit more than you do. But hey, appreciate your comment and "thanks for playing".

The subject of inhertiance was brought up where in this article?

[

From the article.

I'm pretty sure the professors and those who wrote the text books we use know a slight bit more than you do.

1. They likely don't. Poor choice of subject to challenge me about. Try, perhaps, scuba diving.

2. The chances of you leaping to an addle brained conclusion from something unrelated in a text book are similar to me blinking at least once in the next year.



Edited, Apr 9th 2008 5:04pm by Smasharoo

Well, only thing I can say is until you show me how your credentials trump theirs, I'll go with what they say. And it wasn't something i "leaped" to. It was blatently stated in all three classes.