Wealth

[dukeos]

Just checked on Wikipedia, the top 100 billionaires on the planet, and it got me thinking. How much is enough.

I'd say 1 billion should be the cut of. How could you spend more than a billion dollars. Its probably too high, but I'm cutiing some slack for those who have grown up with opulance and probably couldnt hack driving around in a Merc.

If we, the planet's dwellers, redistributed only the top 100 Billionaires wealth, we would have around 1 Trillion dollars to play with. Imagine how much we'd have if we got every Billionaires extra monies. And check out where some of those billionaires live, India, Mexico, Brazil ect ect.

And we spend over a Trillion on "defence".

 

[Liverpool]

Dukeos,

People should earn as much as they want and keep as much as they want.

Simple as that.

 

[Tigers of Old]

"Money doesn't buy you happiness but it does bring you a more pleasant form of misery." - Spike Milligan

 

[Tigerbob]

Yeah good luck to them all....

We all end up in the same place....

 

[Rosy]

Money, get away.
Get a good job with good pay and youre okay.
Money, its a gas.
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash.
New car, caviar, four star daydream,
Think Ill buy me a football team.

Money, get back.
Im all right jack keep your hands off of my stack.
Money, its a hit.
Dont give me that do goody good *smile*.
Im in the high-fidelity first class traveling set
And I think I need a lear jet.

Money, its a crime.
Share it fairly but dont take a slice of my pie.
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today.
But if you ask for a raise its no surprise that theyre
Giving none away.

 

[Broadsword95]

Dukeos,

People should earn as much as they want and keep as much as they want.

Simple as that.

Agreed. Forget your leftist redistribution of wealth rubbish.

 

[dukeos]

Dukeos,

People should earn as much as they want and keep as much as they want.

Simple as that.

Why?

 

[Tiger74]

Why?

because why should someone who works there backside off fork over extra money just because they are successful, while some loser who does SFA outside worshiping the coach gets a hand-out?

Some resdistribution is necessary (which is why we have tiered income tax levels), but go to far and you create a disincentive to work hard, innovate, and invest.

 

[dukeos]

because why should someone who works there backside off fork over extra money just because they are successful, while some loser who does SFA outside worshiping the coach gets a hand-out?

Some resdistribution is necessary (which is why we have tiered income tax levels), but go to far and you create a disincentive to work hard, innovate, and invest.

Im not talking about the bloke who works his six days, builds a nice business that gets him 800,000 a year. Im giving a $1 billion (1000 Million) dollar cut of FFS. Whats the point of having more than you can spend. Half or more of these people didnt lift a finger, a bit of old money of the back of slaves.

 

[Play Centre]

You raise a good point Dukeo. I have always thought that all of us, no matter what our personal circumstances have a responsibilty for each other if we truly live in a community or a society. That means that we should try and help each other in all sorts of different ways. For example, shopping locally will encourage local jobs. Buying food from local markets for example, or from local growers.

Insofar as wealth, well we all earn a different level but I am sure that on top of our taxes we do ditribute it in different ways. Might be supporting a local school fete or a the footy club raffle or donating food or clothing to the local Salvos and so on.

One of the few positives following the recent bushfires was how different people in different ways helped out. some with money, or accommodation, donating money, goods, clothing, food and toys just for starters.

I guess we all do what we can. So an obvious thing for the extremely wealthy in our society would be to help out in the best way they can, probably by donating money to various causes. I know that Richard pratt divides opinion, and I don't want to restart that debate, but from all accounts he was a generous man and very aware of the responsibilities that come with wealth.

I don't know how to arrive at a cut off point like you have, dukeos, because a billion today might be worth less or more tomorrow, but I certainly support the idea of giving, helping, donating or whatever phrase/word you want to use.

Good thread, mate.

 

[Liverpool]

You raise a good point Dukeo. I have always thought that all of us, no matter what our personal circumstances have a responsibilty for each other if we truly live in a community or a society. That means that we should try and help each other in all sorts of different ways. For example, shopping locally will encourage local jobs. Buying food from local markets for example, or from local growers.

I guess we all do what we can. So an obvious thing for the extremely wealthy in our society would be to help out in the best way they can, probably by donating money to various causes. I know that Richard pratt divides opinion, and I don't want to restart that debate, but from all accounts he was a generous man and very aware of the responsibilities that come with wealth.

No, we don't have a responsibility at all....and just because someone is rich doesn't mean they have 'responsibilities' that come with wealth.

What we do have is a responsibility to is OURSELVES first.....and if some dole bludger who rolls out of bed at 10am, watches some Oprah, and then catches the tram down to the nearest Centrelink...or some beggar hassling people on the street for money......if these people can't take responsibility for their OWN actions and life, then why should anyone else?

If I was a millionaire/billionaire....why do I have a responsibility all of a suddent to donate money if I choose not to?
Why does anyone have a responsibility to 'donate' their money to people who can't even take responsibility for their own pathetic lives?

The CHOICE should be there, which it is now...that if people with money CHOOSE to donate or give away money to charities and the like, that should be their business....but no-one should be forced to because they have worked their arses off to earn themselves a nice nest-egg and have some Government regulation force them to hand some over (which the Chairman is doing with his tax hikes on rich people now).

This to me is socialism and discrimination against the "achievers" of this world.....and also making excuses and an easy way out for the people out there with no ambitions in their lives.

 

[Play Centre]

Ah yes, Richard Pratt the socialist!

:cutelaugh

 

[barty boy]

Livers we have all have a responsibilty because we live in a thing called a society

 

[Liverpool]

Ah yes, Richard Pratt the socialist!
:cutelaugh

No, you misunderstand.

Richard Pratt CHOSE to donate money (which I am advocating...freedom of choice)

There isn't a law making him donate money because he has "$ X" in his bank account.

Donating/helping by choice is one thing......having a threshold on wealth where you MUST donate is another.

 

[Play Centre]

No, you misunderstand.

Richard Pratt CHOSE to donate money (which I am advocating...freedom of choice)

There isn't a law making him donate money because he has "$ X" in his bank account.

Donating/helping by choice is one thing......having a threshold on wealth where you MUST donate is another.

No worries, Mr Burns! :cutelaugh

 

[Liverpool]

Livers we have all have a responsibilty because we live in a thing called a society

I don't have a responsibility to others at all.

I have a responsibility to abide by the laws of the nation I am in and to try and live my life in a morally and legally way that I am happy with which doesn't affect others.
I also have a responsibility to try and do the best I can for myself so I am not relying on others.

Just because I live in this thing you call a "society" doesn't mean I am responsible for other people's actions.....because if they took on board similar "ethics" that I try and live my life by, then we wouldn't have crime, we wouldn't have dole bludgers, and we wouldn't have people laying around feeling sorry for themselves.
These are people who take no responsibility for their own actions or lives....and in doing so, affect others in this "society".

These are the people who should be copping the wrath.....not people like me or rich people who got off their butt and did something with their life.

 

[Liverpool]

No worries, Mr Burns! :cutelaugh

Spot on!

If Burns made his nuclear power plant successful and in doing so made himself a wealthy man...why should he then have a responsibility to others in Springfield?
Why should he be punished for his success and other slackers rewarded??

 

[barty boy]

Livers you remind a little of I think it was henry thoreau who went to jail because he refused to pay taxes because he didnt believe in aspects of governmnet policy..LOL

 

[Liverpool]

Livers you remind a little of I think it was henry thoreau who went to jail because he refused to pay taxes because he didnt believe in aspects of governmnet policy..LOL

Thats the thing Barty....we already pay taxes.

What some of the 'do gooders' on this thread are advocating is more or less a "punishment tax".....you strive and do well on your life, and we will punish your hip pocket"

It also encourages the loafers...."Don't get out of bed before midday...we have you covered as we've slugged Monty Burns an extra few million $$$ to sponsor your bludging habits."

 

[Play Centre]

Liverpool, when I buy a bag of apples at the local school fete I don't feel like I am being punished.

Is there something wrong with me?