What does it profit the wealthiest 10% of Americans to hoard 90% of the wealth?

Question

Rusty shackleford likes to answer questions with questions. Well here you go douche. That figure was compiled by the University of California Sociology Departments research. A highly respected and accredited educational institution. There was also a study done by harvard business school that came up with the same figure.

Actually its more than just a sacrifice of time to go to college, especially these days with an inflated cost of education and no raises in minimum wage which is typically the job you will get when you dont have the piece of paper.

For the most part, and our president seems to be a testament to this, the wealthy of this country are not very "hard working" they dont live spare and spartan lifestyles. They have a network of friends who come from very similar if not identical backgrounds who help to set eachother up in sweetheart positions within corporate america

Answer 1

stay rich and let their kids live off the poor?

the distribution is unfair and corporate power is only widening the gap. the tax system could be more progressive and encourage social cohesion by clarifying the fact that profits do not come without corporate social repsonsibility at the very least. corporations should not be allowed to evade taxes through accounting practices. they should make a fair contribution to the communities they rely on to consume their products. shareholders could take a smaller share. the cats are fat enough.

at the highest levels of wealth, both income and inheritance tax should be higher.

Answer 2

Its called capatlism and the bottom 10% lived better than the top 1% in 1900. For example, an anlogy to the income gap is a car a 2001 Ford Focus is worth $6500 dollars with 30k, and then you have a 2004 Bentley with a freezer in it and tv worth 350k its about 36 times more money. The question is are you gonna feel safter with a Bentley with a drunk driver, or a Ford Focus. Like saying are you more secure having 20 million?? instead of 200,000 dollars, both can be pist away at a moment notice. We need to reduce social disparites in terms of healthcare, education, community? Limosuise Liberals, and Gear Jet Convervatives are both out of touch with realty. The consverative guy in UK Cameron said money isnt everything in life. Finally, people are starting to notice its a useless excersie to buy the biggest house, cars. Were basing are progress in Materalism too much than social indicators. The richer we grown in the last 30 years the more suicides we had, teenage wedlocks, more mental illness. We need to reduce the social disparity more than income. Money isnt everything after basic needs are met .

Answer 3

A large majority of wealthy people in the US have earned their money through hard work, or they've inherited it....the latter being the Walton or Kroc family for example. There's nothing wrong with that.

If you bust your butt and earn a fortune to better the lives of both yourself and your family, you have every right to pass it down generationally.

But, broke employee-minded people never understand such a thing. They're content to go 40+ hours per week paycheck to paycheck....letting someone else tell them how much they and their family is worth.

Jealousy accomplishes nothing, instead of hating on those that have done...why don't you go do it too? I used to hate the wealthy as well, until I went into business for myself and understood how much work it takes to make it.

Employee-mentality is the worst thing that's ever happened to our nation.

Answer 4

Many of the wealthiest people aren’t waiting to die to give back to society. Bill Gates and Warn Buffet, two of the richest men in America have given billions of dollars to charity not counting the taxes they have paid directly and indirectly through businesses they own.

I am not a supporter of inherited wealth, but without it there would not be enough capital to start new businesses. Banks can’t do it—it’s too risky. The government can’t do it—they wouldn’t know what to do. So for the most part it is up to the wealthy entrepreneurs to fund the businesses that will help America grow in the future. Just remember, they don’t keep their money in a box under the bed—they keep it invested, which helps our future and theirs.

Answer 5

It's their's and not others' to take through some liberal, Communist maneuvering. And what Janeluvs says is correct -most have earned it.

I recommend that you and others seek a special ed program, or possible psychiatric therapy for your liberal conditioning, which is revealed by your beliefs.

I can't believe how many people there are on here who need it. You've all been brainwashed by liberalism/Communism. You're the type of so-called Americans that will vote for sick Democrats, and the party caters to people like you.

On a positive note, if you have enough humility to read through some of these other replies that explain things, you'll get enough education right on this thread to avoid therapy.

Answer 6

Who do you think employs the 90%?? 38% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%

The overwhelming majority of federal income taxes are paid by the very highest income earners. The top 1% of income earners pay about 32% of all income taxes. The top 5% pays 51.4%. The top 10% of high income earners, pay 63.5%. The top 20% of income earners pays 78% of all federal income taxes. The top 20%


The bottom four-fifths, 80% - the bottom 80% of income earners pay just 20%, 22% of the federal income tax burden. The bottom 80% pay only 20% of the burden. Now, how in the world can anybody with a brain come forth and say, "I am against tax cuts for the rich. I'm only going to have a tax cut for the middle class." If you give a tax cut to people in the bottom 20%, you're not going to stimulate anything. They're not paying any taxes anyway.

Answer 7

that's a declare I even have heard many instances via liberals. They do this to get rid of the indignation of taking peoples funds who paintings for it. If its given, they are able to assert it became given and an unfair benefit. They experience that taking funds that's no longer earned isn't that undesirable as saying whats up he works ninety hours in line with week yet we predict of we'd desire to continually improve taxes on him in spite of paying fifty 4% in taxes already. this is not any longer including revenues tax and supplies etc. Out the door I probable supply 70% of my earnings to the government. for this reason I even have all started a plan to drop 0.5 of my case paintings and enter purely a coping with element. Its unhappy. i'm able to't in any respect recover from the hurdle to be rich no longer purely larger-midsection classification.

Answer 8

The very question reveals an ignorance of what creates wealth in the first place.
If the affluent in America actually sat on all that money they would soon cease to be rich.
What you fail to realize is that the Wealthy in America are in majority Captains of Industry. Therefore this money you seem to feel they hoard creates jobs and pays wages for hard work. Therefore contributing to the economy.
It's easy and primitive to practice "Class Warfare" when you are not willing to take responsibility for your own situation and rather assassinate the character of individuals who simply possess more drive than yourself.

Answer 9

The wealthist people don't hoard their money it is invested.
These investments create jobs, are the money used for busienss loans, for housing loans, for research and so much more.

The money even in the banks are used for investments.
Actually it is saving money that all americans need to get into the habit of.

And in the end, it is thier money to hoard if they want to, since they earned it, they own it, they pay taxes on it and they can do what they want with it, it is not yours or the governments to do anyting with

Answer 10

If all the money were taken from the richest 2 percent (or as you say 10 percent) and equally distributed among everyone else, people would not be better off. They would have more money, but things would cost more money too, so there would be no difference in standard of living. There would just be inflation.