I chose to apply myself,put in the 120 hour weeks,take the risks,and sacrifice my health in order to become a successful business man.
I did this with the expectation of reaping the financial reward that is the end result of this undertaking.
Should I accept the "redistribution of wealth" that SOME Libs and democrats think is appropriate?
2007-10-05 09:00:15 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Added:
mtmeggido:
If you are referring to a financial backer,the answer is no.If you are asking if the people in my employ have contributed to my sucess,the answer is yes.If you are ever in the posistion to be an employer,you will find that employees are the first to ask for a raise and the ones who never offer to give back if a company has a loss.
Pretty much a one sided relationship.I pay my employees based on thier skill level.It's a simple equation:learn and do more and you will earn more.
2007-10-05 09:10:39 · update #1
Beardog:
I pay 42% of my gross in Fed income tax.Add to that state and local.If you remove the incentive to "get ahead" why would people even want to try?
2007-10-05 09:14:04 · update #2
who me:
should not those who take the greatest risks reap the greatest rewards?
2007-10-05 09:15:40 · update #3
smellyfoot:
Are you saying that I made a "bad choice" by striving to get ahead in life and at the same time providing jobs for other Americans?
2007-10-05 09:34:39 · update #4
"You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by destroying the rich."
-Abraham Lincoln
2007-10-05 09:06:13 · answer #1 · answered by KRR 4 · 6⤊ 2⤋
There's a balance that's got to be struck. You've worked very hard to take advantage of the opportunities that this country has provided you. Congragulations. There is a minimum that you'll be expected to give back to the country in return, and it's called taxes. That isn't unfair, and it's not a "redistribution of wealth", it's not even worth whining about. It's the cost of keeping the system running that's been of such benefit to you. If you'd prefer not to pay taxes, cash out and buy an island.
You aren't going to hear the phrase "redistribution of wealth" anywhere but talk radio and Fox news. If you want to know what Liberals actually think, just ask man.
To be perfectly honest, the point of Capitalism is CONSTANT redistribution of wealth. The money doesn't really do any good when it isn't moving around.
2007-10-05 16:08:58 · answer #2 · answered by Beardog 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Redistribution of wealth works both ways. The wealthier Americans are now enjoying their own "redistribution."
We all know the rich are getting richer, and the facts are the wages for the people in the middle of the economic scale have been stagnant for a while.
2007-10-05 16:13:07 · answer #3 · answered by who me 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There IS a redistribution of wealth in the US and it's all going UP to those who need it LEAST! Tax cuts for the richest 1%. Copyright and patent laws that keep drugs expensive. Limitations for how much someone can sue a hospital or corporation. Corporate subsidies aka corporate welfare. The desire to privatize our schools, social security, etc. all forces the tax burden onto the poor and middle class and the rich get RICHER.
2007-10-05 16:08:40 · answer #4 · answered by It's Your World, Change It 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
To me this question is too open ended to be properly addressed. It depends on if you are talking about homeless people having a rotten tooth pulled with my tax money, or the unemployed mother of five with fifteen hundred dollars on her food stamp card. Generally speaking I am for it, but only in instances where it can be easily argued that the money is being spent to prevent suffering and not to promote laziness. People argue to me saying they should have convenience too and be able to shop at every convenience store. I disagree. If I was in control of the program I would limit it to mostly raw fruits, vegetables, grains, and meats. You want Ben & Jerry's and two bags of Oberto's? Get a job.
2007-10-05 16:15:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
We don't have a choice. It's called the tax code.
2007-10-05 16:03:43 · answer #6 · answered by uidittybop 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
"Freedom of choice" is a blanket excuse for making bad choices. Like women who accidentally get pregnant then choose to terminate the baby (I'm not talking about the one's who are victims of incest or rape....) and use "freedom of choice" as their defense. But really, they chose to make bad decisions....
2007-10-05 16:06:39 · answer #7 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋
no, you should not just "accept" the redistribution of wealth. you should fight it.
2007-10-05 16:14:16 · answer #8 · answered by White 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Do you have a choice ? (less subversion/revolution)
2007-10-05 16:08:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Of course not. You worked hard and should enjoy the fruits of your labor, why should I enjoy them?.........
2007-10-05 16:03:48 · answer #10 · answered by Brian 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋