The Rich get a little less RichFollow

It's amusing that you think that what other people do is stronger evidence of what we would do than what we think we would do.

It's not odd at all. You would personally gain via wealth redistribution systems, so you support them. There's nothing surprising, much less altruistic about it.



Yup. You've noodled out the concept of the "wealth line". For bonus points, spend some time thinking about the relative effects of wealth redistribution systems on people at or near that wealth line compared to those who are far far above it.

What you'll find is that barring a complete seizure of all private wealth like in the communist revolutions in Russia and China, all lesser plans mostly just make it harder for people to become wealthy, while having little or no effect on those who are already wealthy.

If I were a multi-billionaire and I wanted to make it nearly impossible for anyone new to enter the big boys club, I'd support exactly the sorts of wealth redistribution schemes usually proposed by Leftist thinkers. Heck. I'd spend money creating think tanks to come up with the plans, launder them out into the campuses of universities and work really hard to make poor, ignorant, college students think that by helping me retain my exclusivity, they're really helping make the world a better place.

Think really hard about what you're supporting and why. Then think really hard about the actual effects the policies you support would create. There's often a disconnect there.



This is because you are thinking like a consumer of goods and services instead of a creator of same. You'd take the money you have and invest it. Actually, since you're counting on a 2% return (after inflation I'm assuming), your money is already invested in some way. By that point, you'd recognize that the money you invest provides the capital which is used by others to produce goods and services and hire people. You'd realize this was all good and that by doing this you were yourself providing hundreds if not thousands of people with benefits.

You would not think in terms of what you need to live off of. You'd think it was silly to just stop investing the returns of your wealth. What would you do with it otherwise? Right now, it's going to help others get jobs and be productive, and you're reaping a small return off of that each year. Where else would you put it? Give it to the government? Give it to the poor? How much? And wouldn't it make more sense to keep building your wealth so that a decade later you could maybe give that same amount to the poor every single year instead of just once?


You think the way you do because you haven't traveled the road necessary to find yourself in the position to make that choice. If you do, you'll make a radically different choice than what you think you'd make today. That's not because you'd have become a "bad person", but you'd realize that you could do more "good" with your money by continuing to invest it than just spending it directly. Heck. You'd have to have learned that lesson before getting there in the first place.


I just find it cute how people who've never had large amounts of money, much less large investment portfolios are so insistent that if they did have those things, they'd magically find some number at which they'd no longer have any use for money and be perfectly willing to just give it all away (or have the government take it away presumably since that's what we're talking about).


Um. No. You wouldn't. It's like a 5 year old insisting that if he were a parent he'd allow his children to eat all the cake and cookies they want, so his parents should do this for him now... Yeah. Cute. We also see right through it.




No. It's not. But your problem is assuming that the rich do what they do because they think so.

Jimmy Buffett?

Edited, Aug 24th 2009 7:35pm by TirithRR

Dude, I've already included in my statement that it is all an assumption, so it's pointless to argue about it. The only closest 'evidence' that one can find out about it, is if it has happened before, which I've already said also.

Learn to read or shut up.

That's a lot of pretty words, but adds nothing new. Your babbling means nothing if you can't back it up. I can give you lots and lots of examples of the rich who opted to keep their fortunes and live a rich lifestyle. Can you find examples of people like which you claim to be?

If you can't, then quit your verbal diarrhoea.

The point is that it's not generosity when it's not your money you're saying you'd give away.

You support redistribution of wealth now. But you'd be the beneficiary of said redistribution if it were to occur now. It's absolutely valid to argue that you'd hold a very different viewpoint if it were your money people were arguing should be redistributed.

You can insist that you honestly would give it all away and have no problem with it now. But the 5 year old child arguing that he'd let his children eat cookies and cake if he were the parent is also being honest, right? Because where he is right now, he sees no reason why that's a bad thing. Just as where are in your life right now, you don't see why redistribution of wealth is a bad thing.


Now the lottery example is a bad one, because it's possible you could win that money and retain your current world view. Odds are you'd lose all your money on bad spending anyway though, so the point is mostly moot. However, if you obtain said money by earning a salary, investing your money, maybe starting your own business, and building it up over time, by the time you were wealthy, you would absolutely no longer thing that rich people didn't do anything to deserve their wealth, and you absolutely would not think that redistribution of wealth is a good idea.


Not because you'd have become greedy, but because you'd have had to learn how money really affects the economy in order to accumulate that much of it. And tha knowledge would enable you to make a more learned choice than you can make today.

Just make a post that says "good job pensive!" (or ********** you pensive!" if you disagree?) after every time he posts?

So, you're saying you're a generous person? That's quite interesting actually, coming from a jobless guy complaining about the rich and wanting a piece of their wealth. But whatever you say, buddy. I'd suggest trying this again when you've made more money.





Of course I can't. I don't have a million. Even if I did, I won't, unless I'm a multi-billionare where a million won't put a dent on my fortune. I'm not stupid enough to make my fortune to just throw it away.





Do you honestly think that the rich not giving their money away like toilet paper is selfish?
Selfish, would be someone not putting any effort to work or make money, but expecting other people to pay for them.

Also, this is my opinion based on how people act. If 50/50 people keep their money while the others give them away, then you'd have a point. But the reality is 99.99% of people at present and past would not give away their fortune.

PS. That 0.01% are people suffering from manic disorder and gave away their fortune after they forgot to take their morning medication.

Honestly, I agree that the vast majority of people who become wealthy won't want to give up their wealth. I mean, if you pursue wealth in that way, you probably value it. Makes sense. Doesn't matter.

-People who have never been to war cannot possibly judge wars as just or unjust.
-People who have never spawned cannot possibly judge whether a parent is right or wrong in any action
-People who have never acted cannot form an aesthetic opinion over theatre
-People who have never made ludicrous sums of money cannot judge whether it is right to have so much

Right?

No. People who have never been to war don't understand what it's like to fight in a war.



No. People who have never raised a child don't understand what it's like to raise a child.



No. People who have never acted don't understand what it's like to act in a theatre production (for example).




No. People who have never earned large sums of money (I'm removing the subjective descriptor you used) cannot know what it's like to have gone through the process of earning large sums of money.



Wrong. You've arrived at conclusions which don't match up to the cases. I said that you lack the perspective to make a good choice in this regard. You specifically have never earned large sums of money, and thus can't possibly state what your position on wealth redistribution would be if you had earned large sums of money.

Of course you can judge whether it's right to have so much. My point is that, having never gone through the process of earning even moderate sums of money, you can't accurately judge what someone else, or even *you* would think if they had done those things.


Just as you could judge a parents actions, but could never be sure you wouldn't do the same thing if you were a parent. Ask the spawned folks on this forum if you don't believe me. Every single parent is sure that they wont do this, or they will do that (usually associated with things that annoy them about parents they know), and then find themselves doing the exact same things when they are the parents. If I had a dollar for every couple I know who insisted with an absolute straight and serious face that they will never use baby talk to their child, only to see them a year later, infant in crib, going "googogaga" whilst playing with the child, trying to get it to sleep, etc.


It's not that you can't "judge". It's that you can't judge how your judgment would change if your own experiences were different than they are. Do you understand that? I know you'd like to pretend that you're some rock of logic and reason and that your opinions and actions are all based on perfect reason and thus should not change, but you're wrong. As you get older and your experiences broaden and your perspective on life changes, you'll change your positions on things. You wont even notice it either. Until one day, you'll look back on something you wrote or said when you were in your teens or early 20s and think that a total stranger wrote that. Or you'll remember something and have a similar response.


It's called "growing up". And it does not stop when you become 18. Not even a little bit...

Sorry man. I wasn't thinking. I'll cut that out.