View Poll Results: Should a multi-billionaire settle for 2 jets instead of 3, 7 homes instead of 10 etc?

Voters
49. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes (if it means serving the greater good)

    12 24.49%
  • No (no one has the right to decide how much wealth is too much)

    37 75.51%
Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 207

Thread: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

  1. #191
    Educator

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-15-13 @ 01:41 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,034

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that is sort of a long winded way of saying personal failure
    Huh? ... wait a minute .. are you trying to resort to resort to defamation again? you silly little turtle you

  2. #192
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,730

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Huh? ... wait a minute .. are you trying to resort to resort to defamation again? you silly little turtle you

    absolutely not

    check this out

    ough the federal tax rate fell by more than half, total tax receipts in the 1980s doubled from $517 billion in 1981 to $1,030 billion in 1990. The top tax rate rose slightly under George H. W. Bush and then moved to 39.6 percent under Bill Clinton. But under George W. Bush it fell again to 35 percent. So what’s striking is that, even as tax rates have fallen by half over the past quarter-century, taxes paid by the wealthy have increased. Lower tax rates have made the tax system more progressive, not less so. In 1980, for example, the top 5 percent of income earners paid only 37 percent of all income taxes. Today, the top 1 percent pay that proportion, and the top 5 percent pay a whopping 57 percent.



  3. #193
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,204

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    According to political compass type websites .. yes they are .. is there anything in particular that strikes you as not being so? You do realize that a persons political stance is not one dimensional right, i.e. there are more issues than taxes, fair wages etc.? By the way, I answered your questions in that other thread (or was it in this one .. can't remember).
    I got your responses. I will go over them tomorrow and respond. Thanks.

    As for your previous answer here, I am afraid to comment, but I will go back to it and reply.

  4. #194
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,204

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    We are all born on earth as free men and women. We all have equal rights to land and resources.
    If you are refering to life, liberty, and property, I think you and I may disagree over what they mean. Skipping life and liberty, we have a right to own property. We do not have a right to property. What is yours is yours and cannot be taken by others. That is what property rights are. So, I believe we differ over your second sentence as property and resources are yours if you own them. You cannot come to my home and begin living in my backyard without my permission, nor can you take my car.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Yet everywhere one looks, we see oppression and unequal opportunity.
    You need to move to where I am as I do not see the oppression and unequal opportunity.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Do you propose that all men/women are not born free?
    If we are talking about the U.S., yes all people who are allowed to be born are free. Those who were not allowed cannot be free.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Do you propose that men/women have the right to disallow others access to the earth and is resources which is owned by everyone?
    I believe there are laws against trespassing. I further believe the sovereign countries can allow or disallow any people from their country as they wish.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    You advertise "Man is born free", yet your posts show how much you support taking away people's freedom by disallowing people their birth given access to land and resources.
    I guess we differ over what being born free means.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Wealth as it exists today is only able to be accumulated because it is light and will not spoil when hoarded. Before currency there was the trade system, which disallowed the extreme hoarding that is capable now.
    Which century are you talking about. This country was founded with currency available. Do you want to go back to the Medieval days? No thanks. I don't want to take 500 bushels of apples to the car dealer in order to purchase a car. Of course, the car dealer could hoard the cars when I could not hoard the apples. Harumph!

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    In the past, people would not grow an orchard of apples and then lock the apples up as they would spoil. Therefore, people never accumulated more than they could use or trade for other goods.
    Not everyone had an orchard. Some had other commodities that would not spoil. Diamonds and rubies have never spoiled and they have been sold for centuries. Ox carts don't spoil; however, if not maintained, they might not last 40 or 50 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    I say this to unveil the artificiality of the wealth people are able to amass in modern society and to unveil who is really stealing and hoarding the earth's wealth.
    I don't see where any of what you have said here has shown anything about the wealthy stealing anything or hoarding anything. I believe that Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Donald Hall (Hallmark Cards), Henry & Richard Block (H & R Block), Fred Smith (Federal Express) and the other entrepreneurs created something that the public or businesses wanted and they made it work and work well. They deserve a great deal of gratitude from the public for their contributions to society. And, you or I could join their ranks. All we need to do is come up with a grand idea and be able to implement it in such a way that the public or businesses love it and want or need it. Isn't capitalism great?

    You seem to see the glass empty. I see it mostly full. I like getting up in the morning with a smile on my face and go to bed the same way. I like the glass mostly full and it is.

  5. #195
    ¡Selah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that is sort of a long winded way of saying personal failure
    Again with the ad homs. Can you not respond to his argument without resorting to hitting people below the belt? If an average person makes a claim that a small percentage of the population hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth, how does that play into personal failure? It doesn't, so stick to arguing the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    absolutely not

    check this out

    ough the federal tax rate fell by more than half, total tax receipts in the 1980s doubled from $517 billion in 1981 to $1,030 billion in 1990. The top tax rate rose slightly under George H. W. Bush and then moved to 39.6 percent under Bill Clinton. But under George W. Bush it fell again to 35 percent. So what’s striking is that, even as tax rates have fallen by half over the past quarter-century, taxes paid by the wealthy have increased. Lower tax rates have made the tax system more progressive, not less so. In 1980, for example, the top 5 percent of income earners paid only 37 percent of all income taxes. Today, the top 1 percent pay that proportion, and the top 5 percent pay a whopping 57 percent.
    The majority of taxes in this country are paid by the upper middle class, who are by no means super wealthy. A shop owner who grosses $500,000 is not wealthy, but most of the federal taxes are sucked out of his income and those like him while the super rich pay a 15% capital gains tax. I think many people are angry at those types of people who got their massive gains through manipulating the market and public policy in their favor.
    “In politics, stupidity is not a handicap.” -Napoleon

  6. #196
    Educator

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-15-13 @ 01:41 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,034

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    If you are refering to life, liberty, and property, I think you and I may disagree over what they mean. Skipping life and liberty, we have a right to own property. We do not have a right to property. What is yours is yours and cannot be taken by others. That is what property rights are. So, I believe we differ over your second sentence as property and resources are yours if you own them. You cannot come to my home and begin living in my backyard without my permission, nor can you take my car.
    O.K. LesGovt, you got me, I shared a little of my philosophical views rather than political ones (although the first does influence the other). In no way am I saying that anything exists, currently, that legally supports these ideas. This is all philosophy and not everyone is a philosopher, I get that--its an "out of the box" type thinking (if you will). According to these philosophies, man should be, but is not born free (this doesn't imply that man could ever be born free either, that is why it is an ideological philosophy).

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    You need to move to where I am as I do not see the oppression and unequal opportunity.
    Great, then there must be very little poverty, very few unemployed, a decent sized lower class, a burgeoning middle class (i.e. those who can pay for necessities and have a little extra afterward), an upper class and a ridiculously rich class ... Please do tell, where do you live, for if what I have described is true, I will move tomorrow and only tell my close family about such a place as it appears that it is an anomaly and I wouldn't want any of the greed-mongers swooping in to affect more hardship.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    If we are talking about the U.S., yes all people who are allowed to be born are free. Those who were not allowed cannot be free.
    Again, the word free has both legal and philosophical implications.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I believe there are laws against trespassing. I further believe the sovereign countries can allow or disallow any people from their country as they wish.
    Now that you mention it, I'm pretty sure you're right about ... there goes my plan to go set up tent in the backyard of someone's home in Greenland (or something).

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I guess we differ over what being born free means..
    Again, the word free has both legal and philosophical implications.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Which century are you talking about. This country was founded with currency available.
    Ummm last time I checked that was true, but gee wiz, I dunno now, you got me all confused

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Do you want to go back to the Medieval days? No thanks.
    Couldn't agree with you more (they had currency then too by the way)

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I don't want to take 500 bushels of apples to the car dealer in order to purchase a car. Of course, the car dealer could hoard the cars when I could not hoard the apples. Harumph!
    This is true, it may not have been the most ideal of circumstances (I think its the concept of the matter that I was getting at, I'm not sure, but, yeah, that's what I was getting at). The only problem with a car dealer hoarding cars in a trade market would be that the person would end up starving as they need food to live. Without trading his or her goods he or she would starve! Harumph!

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Not everyone had an orchard. Some had other commodities that would not spoil. Diamonds and rubies have never spoiled and they have been sold for centuries. Ox carts don't spoil; however, if not maintained, they might not last 40 or 50 years.
    This is a valid point, people could hoard to a degree and the hoarding likely became more extensive as time went on.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Isn't capitalism great?
    Yes, it has many good qualities, but like any system it is far from perfect and that is why we do not have free market capitalism

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    You seem to see the glass empty. I see it mostly full. I like getting up in the morning with a smile on my face and go to bed the same way. I like the glass mostly full and it is.
    I noticed you made an assumption as to how I see the glass (half full or half empty). To avoid making assumptions, you could just ask me how I see the glass .. I don't know .. just a pointer I guess. So assuming you asked that question, I am taking it into good faith that you would because you seem like a nice person, I would answer that I see the glass both half full and half empty (if you want to start using colloquialisms), i.e. a realist. It is my opinion that if people do not open their eyes to see reality and instead stick their head in the sand, they are guilty of neglect as they fail to see problems that need fixing and thus actions that need to be taken to fix such problems.[/QUOTE]
    Last edited by MusicAdventurer; 07-25-11 at 03:22 AM.

  7. #197
    Educator

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-15-13 @ 01:41 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,034

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    absolutely not

    check this out

    ough the federal tax rate fell by more than half, total tax receipts in the 1980s doubled from $517 billion in 1981 to $1,030 billion in 1990. The top tax rate rose slightly under George H. W. Bush and then moved to 39.6 percent under Bill Clinton. But under George W. Bush it fell again to 35 percent. So what’s striking is that, even as tax rates have fallen by half over the past quarter-century, taxes paid by the wealthy have increased. Lower tax rates have made the tax system more progressive, not less so. In 1980, for example, the top 5 percent of income earners paid only 37 percent of all income taxes. Today, the top 1 percent pay that proportion, and the top 5 percent pay a whopping 57 percent.
    With inflation does it not make sense that we would make more money as time goes by anyway? Aren't there many more factors that could account for an increase as well?

    Additionally, I don't believe we were in a recession in those years.

    Additionally, as with any analysis of data, one cannot only point out the figures he or she likes best and attribute causation. Correlation does not = causation, as a lawyer I am sure you already knew this, so why make that argument. It could support of your hypothesis, but until other factors that could also account for an increase in tax receipts are ruled out, your hypothesis is what the scientific community would term "weak"
    Last edited by MusicAdventurer; 07-25-11 at 03:36 AM.

  8. #198
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,204

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    I noticed you made an assumption as to how I see the glass (half full or half empty). To avoid making assumptions, you could just ask me how I see the glass .. I don't know .. just a pointer I guess. So assuming you asked that question, I am taking it into good faith that you would because you seem like a nice person, I would answer that I see the glass both half full and half empty (if you want to start using colloquialisms), i.e. a realist. It is my opinion that if people do not open their eyes to see reality and instead stick their head in the sand, they are guilty of neglect as they fail to see problems that need fixing and thus actions that need to be taken to fix such problems.
    Yes, I made an assumption, but it is a based on how I perceive what you say. Now, it is my perception and, of course, my perception could be incorrect. On the other hand, I will wait for my perception foof your half-full side to come forward.

  9. #199
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,204

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Would a true liberal be willing to to add his or her Yes, No, or Unsure to these questions? If yes, please add a /after the second reply and add your own Y, N, or U. I'm just curious as to how the three of us would stack up. Thanks.

    1.)Do you believe that vouchers to pay for k-12 education would provide for more competition if it included public, charter, private and parochial schools? Y/Y
    2.) Is competition a good thing? Y/Y
    3.) Do you support the concept of "gay marriages?" N/Y
    4.) We should privatize SS - Y/U
    5.) We should stop all 3rd payers (companies and govt) for healthcare insurance - Y/N
    6.) Banning lightbulbs is not free enterprise and is not a good idea - Y/N
    7.) The Bush tax cuts were taxes for the wealthy - N/N
    8.) We should close down the Dept of Education - Y/U
    9.) Abortion is morally wrong - Y/N
    10.) It is proven that there is global warming and that it is man-made - N/Y
    11.) Support President Obama's healthcare plan - N/Y
    12.) If the debt ceiling is not lifted, it will be the fault of the GOP - N/N
    13.) Drilling for oil and gas should be allowed in many more places - Y/Y
    14.) There are far too many Federal regulations - Y/Y
    15.) If we had no taxes on companies, we would not have an unemployment problem - Y/N
    16.) The tax code should be gutted and replaced with a flat tax - Y/N
    17.) The tax code should be gutted and replaced with a Natl Sales Tax - N/N

    I took a little bit of liberty here with your answers. I think I have gotten our agreements and disagreements right, but could have one wrong. The U means Unsure.

    Here is the tally:

    We agree: 7/17
    We disagree: 8/17
    Unsure: 2/17

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    As I am not very familiar with both sides to this issue, I would have to hear the pros and cons for the other side before I could make a Yes or No Decision. As you have stated it though, it doesn't sound so bad.

    So long as everyone still receives adequate healthcare, I think providing vouchers is the best idea; so I think this is a Yes (but only if ...). What this means is that the government would have to define what adequate healthcare is and healthcare providers would have to provide such care to those with vouchers at no extra cost. If this were the case, my answer would be Yes.

    Yes I agree with this; conserving energy affects everyone, not just the consumer and the seller.

    There are arguments that (regardless of your definition of most) these tax cuts were for the wealthy and there are arguments that they are for those who are not wealthy. So in that sense my answer is No, as usually in disputes were both parties claim completely different things, one side it partially correct and so it the other.

    As I am not very familiar with both sides to this issue, I would have to hear the pros and cons for the other side before I could make a Yes or No Decision. As you have stated it though, it doesn't sound so bad.

    I actually have to say that on this one, there are few situations where I would think that the mother should not have the right to choose. So we disagree on this one.

    O.K., if you do not believe we are assisting to warm the planet at all, then we do disagree (at least on this one)

    I am referring to what I was talking about in my answer to #5 regarding healthcare insurance. So my answer is that I support his plan until a privatized plan (as described above) allows all citizens adequate healthcare.

    Get back to you on this ...

    So ... it appears that we disagree on 2 more and do not definitively disagree or agree on any of the others ... unless I have cleared things up ... ?

  10. #200
    Educator

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-15-13 @ 01:41 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,034

    Re: Billionaires: free to romp or responsible to fellow citizens?

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Would a true liberal be willing to to add his or her Yes, No, or Unsure to these questions? If yes, please add a /after the second reply and add your own Y, N, or U. I'm just curious as to how the three of us would stack up. Thanks.

    1.)Do you believe that vouchers to pay for k-12 education would provide for more competition if it included public, charter, private and parochial schools? Y/Y
    2.) Is competition a good thing? Y/Y
    3.) Do you support the concept of "gay marriages?" N/Y
    4.) We should privatize SS - Y/U
    5.) We should stop all 3rd payers (companies and govt) for healthcare insurance - Y/N
    6.) Banning lightbulbs is not free enterprise and is not a good idea - Y/N
    7.) The Bush tax cuts were taxes for the wealthy - N/N
    8.) We should close down the Dept of Education - Y/U
    9.) Abortion is morally wrong - Y/N
    10.) It is proven that there is global warming and that it is man-made - N/Y
    11.) Support President Obama's healthcare plan - N/Y
    12.) If the debt ceiling is not lifted, it will be the fault of the GOP - N/N
    13.) Drilling for oil and gas should be allowed in many more places - Y/Y
    14.) There are far too many Federal regulations - Y/Y
    15.) If we had no taxes on companies, we would not have an unemployment problem - Y/N
    16.) The tax code should be gutted and replaced with a flat tax - Y/N
    17.) The tax code should be gutted and replaced with a Natl Sales Tax - N/N

    I took a little bit of liberty here with your answers. I think I have gotten our agreements and disagreements right, but could have one wrong. The U means Unsure.

    Here is the tally:

    We agree: 7/17
    We disagree: 8/17
    Unsure: 2/17
    Not quite as liberal as you first thought aye?

    I will admit, there are certain topics for which I take a Liberal stance, however, as you can see, the number of topics I am truly Liberal on is probably closer to 50% of the issues than 75%.

    What about you? How conservative do you think you are? Do you agree with all of their stances on the various issues?

Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •