2006-12-26 10:56:10 · 25 answers · asked by Kate the Saint 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I really don't see why any one person needs to have more than about $100million. Most of the money in the U.S. is concentrated in the hands of just a few people. Those folks have designed the tax and political system around themselves in a way that they get filthy rich and have to do nothing. In most cases their entire extended families will never have to work again, nor will the next generations.
We would be much better off with a system based on merit as opposed to the inheritance based system we have right now. This is what caused the decline of many civilizations before us.
2006-12-26 11:03:55 · answer #1 · answered by Jason 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
wow look at all these people who probably have a net worth of negative 200,000 saying there should be no cap on wealth...
the middle class is disappearing and lives are being ruined every day because 35% of all the money in the county is held by 5% of the population. they did studies on this and found that there is a delusion in the middle and lower classes that makes them think they are going to get to that top 5%... so i assume that's why people here are saying no to the cap. well, sorry to break your hearts but even if you win the lotto you won't be in the top 5%
excessive wealth is ruining the country, and we are on our way to becoming an India, China, or Nigeria - where all of the money is in the hands of a small group of people... but NOOO who would vote for a cap on net worth - - only a communist?! well china is a communist country and it has the biggest divide.
Why should Bill gates get to have 43 billion dollars and essentially set public policy with his money? Also, anyone with >10 million dollars are the people who are buying all the 2nd homes, 4th cars, extra clothes, extra oil, driving up the prices for ALL of us - because they have too much money. 30% of homes purchased in the last year were SECOND homes purchased by the wealthy when many people can't even afford a FIRST home. yet - a cap on wealth is "communist" - how asenine.
Nobody needs or should have more than 50 million dollars. period. ... and even that is pushing it.
I'm not talking about removing incentives for the guy who makes 36k. Im talking about lowering home prices, lowering grocery prices, and making america have a middle class again - not an elite class and a working class. This is what you are all against?
2006-12-28 12:59:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. So someone found a way to make billions of dollars. Just because 99.9% of the population can't think rich doesn't mean that .1% should suffer for that ignorance...
There are however societies where everyone has the same amount of money. Communism's like that. It's uncommon today, but I think it works better in developing societies.
2006-12-26 11:04:00 · answer #3 · answered by Chris_Knows 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. If they are going to generous like Warren Buffet or Bill gates there should not be a limit. Some governments by extra tax limit their wealth but what those governments do is pathetically scary for me.
2006-12-26 11:01:20 · answer #4 · answered by Rammohan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the good thing about america is...anyone can be rich one day.
In most socialist countries like England, France, and Belgium, the common man hates the rich, because the commoner knows that there is no possibble way for them to be rich because hard work is punished, not rewarded.
Having said that, I think that if one person is worth more than all of africa like bill gates is, they should be forced to give some of their money to me.
2006-12-26 11:03:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe not one person but absolutely corporations should be limited to keep them from being more powerful then "We the People" and we the people use government to oversee the corporations operations to make sure the corporation don`t harm us people.
2006-12-26 11:03:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
huey long-ish... interesting idea... but I'm not so sure how feasible it is...
as far as your idea goes... increasing taxes on the uber-wealthy even more would probably be easier and more productive in the end...
2006-12-26 11:04:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, in a free enterprise system, it is the ability to gain wealth that makes business happen for everyone.
2006-12-26 11:04:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not in a Democracy.
That would eliminate the free market economy.
Definitely in Socialist or Communist countries.
2006-12-26 11:07:27 · answer #9 · answered by STILL standing 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If anything they make over 20 mill goes to me they heck yes!
2006-12-26 11:30:00 · answer #10 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋