Do we have the right to tax people in order to help the poor?

[garygary]

In the US the poor pay more tax then the rich. Plus there is a redistribution of wealth, from the poor and middle class to the rich!

Dalek, perhaps this is the disconnect. Raw Thought said that the poor pay more tax than the rich. I was simply saying that the above is a false statement as evidenced by the data.

That the rich don't pay their fair share is a different argument.

[Dalek Prime]

I took "the rich" and "the poor," to mean "rich individuals" and "poor individuals."

To follow up on your insertion of businesses: When you say "Apple Corp" I assume you are speaking of the computer company, not the corporation set up by the Beatles as a tax shelter. So, who exactly owns Apple Computers?

The richest people own the most stock. And other shell company's that are owned by others. And that's what it is, Gary. A rich mans shell game.

[Dalek Prime]

In the US the poor pay more tax then the rich. Plus there is a redistribution of wealth, from the poor and middle class to the rich!

Dalek, perhaps this is the disconnect. Raw Thought said that the poor pay more tax than the rich. I was simply saying that the above is a false statement as evidenced by the data.

That the rich don't pay their fair share is a different argument.

Fair enough Gary. I hear you. But you will admit, there is an ever growing wealth divide, yes? Just in the bank bailouts, everyone's money went to the wealthiest. No one else saw that money, which they all still owe. That's the nature of capitalism. Externalizing losses. And who picks up the losses? You and me.

Did Exxon pay the true costs of their spill? No, taxes did. People pay for the wealthy with money and blood.

[garygary]

60 percent of Apple is owned by institutional holders. Concerning the institutional holders, millions of "less-than-rich" people across the globe have investments in these holding companies and are therefore owners of Apple Computer.

What I don't get is why you chumps, who aren't on this gravy train, or in the richest 1%, keep supporting people who wouldn't give you the time of day, let you into their gated communities, and rob you by not paying their fair share. Unless you think, by kissing their asses, they'll throw you crumbs off their plates. That's it, isn't it. You're just toadies, waiting for your day in the sun.

My goal on this website is to rationally explore thoughts and ideas and to possibly be enlightened. It is absolutely not my intention to cause people to become emotionally upset. I will attempt to be less confrontational and more tactful in the future. Sorry.

[Dalek Prime]

No need to be sorry, Gary. I get emotional about these things all by myself, without anyone's aid lol! And I apologize for going off on you like that. I've misjudged you as a capitalist lackey, and for that, I am sorry. I can see you are much deeper than that.

I think I'm angry that I cant have faith in mankind, with the life-system we have, that none of us seem to be willing or able to change. I swore I wouldn't bring kids into this world because of it. What would there be for them? Anyways, please forgive. I do go on sometimes.

[Dalek Prime]

Dalek Prime, the thread killer.

[prof]

Ned asks:


Do we have the right to tax people in order to help the poor?


Yes.

Only if, however, all that revenue collected is used to do all that can be done to reduce and alleviate misery and destitution. An ethical administration will work on the goal of eliminating poverty ...but not simple-living. Poverty cannot be eliminated altogether, but a good government would go in that direction.

[Skip]

Why cannot poverty be eliminated altogether?

The US has been waging war on it for decades - about as successfully as they have on drugs, crime and terror. All the things on which American governments make war tend to keep getting worse. So... How about taking a really close look at the war chest? What do you bet a lot more money goes into arms contracts than problem-solving? What do you bet the income disparity between the richest and poorest has grown, not shrunk, since 1964? And that's just the reported moneys, not the billions that disappear without a trace.

[Obvious Leo]

not the billions that disappear without a trace.

Or the trillions that disappear into overseas tax havens without ever being taxed in any nation.

[uwot]

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... re-economy
The trillions of dollars in secret off shore accounts is commensurate with the US and UK national debt. The collateral our governments have traded is the goodwill of future generations. Basically, our representatives have promised that our children's, children's, children's children will spend a significant proportion of their working lives just earning the money to pay for other people's lifestyles. That is free market economics: our descendants' labour has become a commodity stashed away in they Cayman Islands.

[prof]

Thank you, Skip, Leo and uwot, for speaking the truth, and being so clear about it !!!!

We need government personnel, officials and staff, who know and live their Ethics. It is urgent that Ethical knowledge be disseminated. Then we will get our priorities straight. Things need to be done in the right order, and policies need to be implemented that enhance the quality of human life and of its habitat, the planet, Earth. We need to care about our environment! We need to lessen the impact of Climate Change; we have for too long polluted the air and water, and toxified the soil. We manufacture needless tensions for ourselves due to our irrational beliefs and our distorted personal value systems. Let's start moving in the right direction ....the Ethical direction. The benefits are enormous



.....Your views?

[Skip]

Anyone get a postcard from Julian Asange lately?

On the other hand, there is a wonderful novel by my favourite living writer, William Gibson, titled Spook Country, that sheds some (de)light on the subject of secrets and disappearing money.

Me, I've given up trying.

[prof]

Why cannot poverty be eliminated altogether?

...Me? I've given up trying.

There will always be relative poverty in that some clever, creative types will have figured out how to attract more money - as long as we have a price system.

As long as we measure scarcity by assigning a price to things and stuff, some who would receive a grant equal to yours will fritter it away on their addiction, whatever addiction it may be, while you save yours (or even perhaps invest it wisely.) Athletes who are very competent in sports or entertainment stars who become celebrities will attract money to themselves - as will shrewd schemers, say those who have a system to beat a casino. {Those who have inherited a seat on a kind of stock or options exchange, or who were given one by an uncle who had one earlier, and who have the intellect to know what to do with it to maximum advantage, can become market-makers. This is a road to wealth, even though hard work is involved. One must have a good work ethic to go in every day and keep an eye on four or more TV screens and/or monitors at once. Since the market is a casino of sorts, they will accrue wealth. Yes, they seem to have a special privilege, but it is not because they sought it out: it was given to them! ...given partly by Nature and partly by a relative.}

You haven't given up trying, Skip, if you participate in threads that ask good questions, such as this one. Thank go to Ned for initiating it, but you, Skip, have started a thread here and there on your own. ...So you really haven't given up yet!

P.s. Watch for my next book - one which keeps technicalities to a minimum - and is designed for the high-school or college student. The title begins with the word "Keys."

Until then, review viewtopic.php?f=7&t=15200
and viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13696 and viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13302

[Systematic]

We shouldn't tax all people to help the poor--only those people well beyond the millionaire mark.

[prof]

Greetings, Systematic

I agree with what you wrote !! The problem is that some of those billionaires are rather selfish - or at least self-centered. It may not be fitting to label them "psychopaths" but they can't be bothered "with those (little) people."

After a while those with affluence often get used to being in an upper class, and they acquire a feeling of superiority - as they see that they have freedoms that others do not enjoy.

bTW, are you systematic with regard to ethics?? If so, please let us know more about it. I would welcome a p.m. from you, or you could communicate your findings to everyone here by posting a response right here. {I am confident you would concur that Ethics could use more systematizing....}