• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Redistribution of Wealth.

Is Redistribution of Wealth a valid exercise of Government authority?


  • Total voters
    41

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
An often mentioned subject that I'd like to gauge DP's general opinion on. Is redistribution of wealth a valid exercise of government authority?
 
Some redistribution is the price we pay for a wealthy society. I think the question is in degree.
An often mentioned subject that I'd like to gauge DP's general opinion on. Is redistribution of wealth a valid exercise of government authority?
 
There is a natural tendency for power and wealth to concentrate.

The richer you are the easier it is to become more rich.

If you have made a fortune; well done!

Right, what is it for? I mean, once you have the second car, the horse, the second house, the 6 vacations a year.... What do you want more money for?

Obviously the answer is that you are highly competitive and enjoy the whole process of making money. If that was not the case you wouldn't be where you are. Again, good on you!

So the money after the first million is just keeping score. It's just about competition. So why not give lots of it away in tax? As long as all the other millionaires have to do the same.

Would you like to live in world where there are lots of utterly desperate people looking to rob you with violence at the slightest opportunity? Or prefer the freedom, the social wealth, to be able to walk down to the shop and visit the pub on the way home without a body guard?
 
Unfortunately, yes.

The end result of capitalism is monopoly. The only way to prevent that is regulation, but more regulation results in entry barriers more and more extreme, resulting in more and more pooling of wealth.
 
Please define what is meant by "redistribution of wealth".

You talking about income taxes?
 
An often mentioned subject that I'd like to gauge DP's general opinion on. Is redistribution of wealth a valid exercise of government authority?

The poll might as well be:

are you liberal or conservative...IMO, the vote will probably be about the same.
 
I would say no. In my opinion, the purpose of government is to...you know...govern. This means to arbitrate disputes and to secure our person, property, and individual liberty from assault and violation from other citizens and from foreign powers.
 
I would say no. In my opinion, the purpose of government is to...you know...govern. This means to arbitrate disputes and to secure our person, property, and individual liberty from assault and violation from other citizens and from foreign powers.

So things like education, roads, hospitals, sewers, clean water to drink, police fire and rescue.......those things should only be available to the people who can afford it? The rich?
 
government may stick its nose in your uterus but not in your wallet
 
The poll might as well be:

are you liberal or conservative...IMO, the vote will probably be about the same.
Perhaps. Although there are conservatives in my personal experience and here on DP that recognize the need for such in various forms.
 
Please define what is meant by "redistribution of wealth".

You talking about income taxes?
By in large yes, although taxes on financial transactions and inheritance in order to fund social safety nets and supplement the poor's income could also apply.
 
By in large yes, although taxes on financial transactions and inheritance in order to fund social safety nets and supplement the poor's income could also apply.

So that comes back to my other question for a different member's post.

So things like education, roads, hospitals, sewers, clean water to drink, police fire and rescue.......those things should only be available to the people who can afford it? The rich?
 
So things like education, roads, hospitals, sewers, clean water to drink, police fire and rescue.......those things should only be available to the people who can afford it? The rich?

In most mass markets, the majority of firms sell products not to the rich but to middle and lower income buyers. There are many more Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas bought than Lamborghinis.
 
In most mass markets, the majority of firms sell products not to the rich but to middle and lower income buyers. There are many more Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas bought than Lamborghinis.

And this means what exactly? Sorry, I don't know what your point is.
 
And this means what exactly? Sorry, I don't know what your point is.

My point: On the market, firms supply goods to the rich, middle class, and poor, with the overwhelming majority of firms catering to the middle class and poor. So, no, the goods you mention, like all goods, won't only be available to the rich.
 
Wealth distribution is almost exclusively for hypocrites and mooches.

The hypocrites are the wealthy people that run around saying that taxes should be raised...but then why don't they just donate extra money at tax time, if it's the right thing to do? Because they are hypocrites. They either believe it will never happen in their life time or their team of accountants promise them that they will loophole their way into making sure these billionaires don't pay an extra penny OR they will just leave the country if it goes too far.
So they run around telling people they want to pay more taxes so they can look noble - all while not actually doing anything about it.


And the mooches? For them, it's nothing more then greed and resentment.

These mooches have enough to live on just by sitting on their asses and filling out the right government forms. And if everyone was in the same boat, they would probably be fine with it. But since there are people that have great wealth...they get resentful. They feel wealth is impossible for them. So, they don't want anyone else to be wealthy either.
Of course, they will NEVER admit that...maybe not even to themselves. But that IS the basis for all this.

It's not that they need more money to survive. They already have the basics of survival. In fact, there are probably billions in the world that would love to be as 'rich' as the 'poor' American on welfare.

No, they want more stuff and they don't know how to earn it...so they want the rich to give it to them. Which kills two birds with one stone...it gets them their free extra stuff AND it makes the rich, poorer.

Oh, they will make it sound noble and decent. And they will get a bunch of liberal think tanks to publish 'exhaustive' studies that prove how good it would be for America (which it isn't, of course. But you can always make a study back up just about any position you wish).

But in the end...it all comes down to two things:

greed and resentment.

Btw - this does not make them 'bad' people...just human.
 
Last edited:
So things like education, roads, hospitals, sewers, clean water to drink, police fire and rescue.......those things should only be available to the people who can afford it? The rich?

What are you talking about? Most, if not all, of what you mention are not federal gov't constitutional powers in the first place. The objection is not to use of taxation to fund gov't infrastructure, or to provide gov't services for the benefit of all, but to taxing some citizens in order to provide "free stuff" to other citizens based on their "personal need" for gov't help in meeting basic living expenses. Few object to helping the elderly or disabled using public funds, but to offer a reward (via income redistribution, from so called "safety net" programs) for personal economic failure, to the "working class" is simply insane and now accounts for about 25% of total federal spending.
 
Redistribution of wealth is unworkable and contrary to Biblical principles.

A Jewish rabbi explains why, and a Christian provides his commentary.

Obama vs. the Bible – Redistribution of Wealth « The Righter Report

Excerpts:

"It is America’s men and women of wealth, imbued with religious and civic responsibility, who have served as the greatest patrons of the civic infrastructure, be it hospitals, libraries, museums, the arts, or the charitable United Way. England once had those patrons, but they went away as redistribution of wealth came in."

"The primary theme of the Bible is individual responsibility, not entitlement and dependency."
 
Wealth distribution is for hypocrites and mooches...period.

The hypocrites are the wealthy people that run around saying that taxes should be raised...but then why don't they just donate extra money at tax time, if it's the right thing to do? Because they are hypocrites. They either believe it will never happen in their life time or their team of accountants promise them that they will loophole their way into making sure these billionaires don't pay an extra penny OR they will just leave the country if it goes too far.
So they run around telling people they want to pay more taxes so they can look noble - all while not actually doing anything about it.


And the mooches? For them, it's nothing more then greed and resentment.

These mooches have enough to live on just by sitting on their asses and filling out the right government forms. And if everyone was in the same boat, they would probably be fine with it. But since there are people that have great wealth...they get resentful. They feel wealth is impossible for them. So, they don't want anyone else to be wealthy either.
Of course, they will NEVER admit that...maybe not even to themselves. But that IS the basis for all this.

It's not that they need more money to survive. They already have the basics of survival. In fact, there are probably billions in the world that would love to be as 'rich' as the 'poor' American on welfare.

No, they want more stuff and they don't know how to earn it...so they want the rich to give it to them. Which kills two birds with one stone...it gets them their free extra stuff AND it makes the rich, poorer.

Greed and resentment.

I am neither resentful, nor especially greedy, nor am I hypocritical or a mooch.

I work 60 hours or more a week, my wife works 45-50, we make over 100k a year post bonuses, between us. I am perfectly willing to pay my taxes. I could care less about how much the wealthy make, up to the point that their greed begins to harm the economy...MY economy...OUR economy.

You may want to rethink your assessment.
 
Redistribution of wealth is unworkable and contrary to Biblical principles.

A Jewish rabbi explains why, and a Christian provides his commentary.

Obama vs. the Bible – Redistribution of Wealth « The Righter Report

Excerpts:

"It is America’s men and women of wealth, imbued with religious and civic responsibility, who have served as the greatest patrons of the civic infrastructure, be it hospitals, libraries, museums, the arts, or the charitable United Way. England once had those patrons, but they went away as redistribution of wealth came in."

"The primary theme of the Bible is individual responsibility, not entitlement and dependency."

Individual responsibility, eh?

Tell that to all the children burned in Gamora, or drowned in the flood, bub.
 
What are you talking about? Most, if not all, of what you mention are not federal gov't constitutional powers in the first place. The objection is not to use of taxation to fund gov't infrastructure, or to provide gov't services for the benefit of all, but to taxing some citizens in order to provide "free stuff" to other citizens based on their "personal need" for gov't help in meeting basic living expenses. Few object to helping the elderly or disabled using public funds, but to offer a reward (via income redistribution, from so called "safety net" programs) for personal economic failure, to the "working class" is simply insane and now accounts for about 25% of total federal spending.

The OP left everything so wide open to interpretation I have no idea what's being discussed and what ins't.

You seem to have thought along a different path than I did as to what's being discussed here.

Income taxes are both federal, state, city, county......which pay for things like roads, schools, police, fire & rescue.......
 
Individual responsibility, eh?

Tell that to all the children burned in Gamora, or drowned in the flood, bub.

Their parents made their bed for them. They engaged in wickedness and put their families in harm's way of God's judgments. Just like liberals and the heathens are doing today.
 
Redistribution of wealth is unworkable and contrary to Biblical principles.


Fantastic....let's base the USofA's entire governmental and social infrastructure on THE BIBLE. :roll::roll::roll::lamo
 
Their parents made their bed for them. They engaged in wickedness and put their families in harm's way of God's judgments. Just like liberals and the heathens are doing today.

Kinda puts a damper on INDIVIDUAL responsibility, lol.
 
The OP left everything so wide open to interpretation I have no idea what's being discussed and what ins't.

You seem to have thought along a different path than I did as to what's being discussed here.

Income taxes are both federal, state, city, county......which pay for things like roads, schools, police, fire & rescue.......

Texas has no state income tax at all. Most "safety net", income redistribution programs, are federal, although some have state fund matching components, so I chose to focus on the federal level. Providing for basic infrastructure and public services (e.g. police and fire departments) is not, IMHO, income redistribution since no citizen is receiving a regular monthly cash benefit from them (other than their gov't employees).
 
Back
Top Bottom