im not sure i get this redistribution of the wealth ,why as a person who worked hard to have a 9 digit bank account why i should have to give my money away.
can some one explain the ideas of redistribution of wealth?
and how can that be constitutional?
2007-11-25
07:14:39
·
13 answers
·
asked by
djominous20
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Elections
i give to charity my daughter has lukiemia my wife has epolepsy (sp?)
i donate to those charities that deal with those illnesses regularly i donate 5 figures to both a yr
if a dem gets elected that wants to do that ill move my money off shore and pay the tax on moving it
and unless you understand i pay more taxes a yr then you pay in 5 then you need to study the tax system
2007-11-25
07:53:18 ·
update #1
wow i didnt pay 165 000 dollars in taxes last yr wow i should sue my tax agent for the money i payed taxes on , oh wait i did have to pay taxes just like any of you so i dont get your point
2007-11-25
10:06:23 ·
update #2
holocaust denial????? when was that and im dyslexic i do the best i can so get off my back
2007-11-25
10:08:57 ·
update #3
thank you to those who dont judge me because i worked up from nothing and the fact i enjoy wrestling has nothing to do with my buisness i have my buisness in this country and italy and i have money invested all which was done on my time and effort
2007-11-25
10:11:04 ·
update #4
that question you refered to was about the little know fact that the nazis didnt start killing the jews till the ba'athe party made a deal to keep the jews from coming to the holy land and to get the royal family out of iraq in exchange for the oil so where did i deny the death of millions of jews
2007-11-25
10:18:24 ·
update #5
You shouldn't. Redistribution of wealth doesn't work and will never work. Did you know it was tried when the pilgrims first came to America? The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well. Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened? IT DIDN'T WORK!! The rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years, trying to make it work, trying to perfect it. The pilgrims put it where it belongs, on the scrap heap. Governor Breadford said it best "The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years...that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God," Bradford wrote. "For this community was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense...that was thought injustice."
The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford's community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property. Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result?
"This had very good success," wrote Bradford, "for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been."
But if you are like me, you were never taught this in school and children still are not taught this in school. In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London. And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the "Great Puritan Migration."
Redistribution of wealth is an old idea, and it doesn't work and never will work. The idea that you should work your whole life to support people who won't work to support themselves is ludicrous.
The top 25% of wage earners pay the most taxes. They pay 84.6% of ALL federal income taxes. Yet you hear with sneers how only the rich get tax cuts and it isn't fair because they have more money than anybody else. Well good for them. They worked hard to earn it, they deserve it and shouldn't be taxed any differently. The top 1% of wage earners pay 36.89% of all federal income taxes. Now who deserves the tax cuts? Who pays the most taxes? The rich of course. So next time a politicians whines and fusses how the President gave tax cuts to the rich who don't deserve them, let it go in one ear and out the other because now you know the truth!
2007-11-25 15:39:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by jmiah17 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
The term "redistribution of wealth" means ANY use of your wealth, including buying a cheeseburger, a haircut, a car, whatever as well as paying taxes or acts of charity.
You do not have to give to charity. You can hoard your money and watch it accumulate till the day you die if you wish.
Whatever choice you make, feel free to be more intelligent than those idiots who think your choice of giving to a charity you support (or not) has ANYTHING to do with a political party, or with the FACT that there will always be people in need of compassion for reasons they have no control over, like getting cancer, having their homes destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, etc.... people less fortunate than you and I.
You have a nine digit bank balance, somewhere between $100,000,000 and $999,999,999? If this is true, then think of the power you have to change a few people's lives for the better by using perhaps 0.1% of this to help your friends, family or neighbors live a better life in times of need?
You would still have 99.9% of your wealth and you would be far more human and compassionate than the greedy SOB's that tell you not to give to charity.
By the way, use of money has nothing to do with the constitution. It has everything to do with capitalism.
2007-11-25 07:42:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr Smart 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Wow, I am very impressed with your bank account balance.
I was very intrigued by your tale of a being over taxed, your lack of compassion for others who weren't as fortunate as yourself and the fact that I've never heard anyone say 9 digit bank account so I did some research on your previous questions.
When I need someone to speak at length about Professional Wrestling (over 100 questions) and Holocaust Denial I will look you up. FYI, you should learn to spell.
2007-11-25 09:49:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by mickbw 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well grace is a bit like insurance isn't it. You say you work hard so it is assumed you use some effort and some limbs to do so. What will happen - God forbid - if you fell off your perch while going about your business. Saying grace is not about how you got your food but being thankful that you did get it in the first place. Something to remember.
2016-04-05 21:56:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In a capitialistic society as America is the redistribution of wealth wont fly. We work hard for what we have and I dont want to give it to lazy people who think I owe them because they are lazy and dont want to work.
The Dems such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have preached for decades the government owes it to the poor and the rich owe it to the poor so the lazy have that mentalilty we owe them. STUPID!
It isnt constitutional, it isnt anyone right to have what you have without working for it, now if the Kennedys and the Clintons want to give their money away because they are for redistribtuion , then go right ahead!
2007-11-25 07:39:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lisa D 2
·
5⤊
1⤋
You shouldn't have to. Your question is just one more reason to keep a Democrat out of the Whitehouse. I am all for paying my fair share as are most people. The problem comes when we have to let the libs decide what a fair amount is. Congrats to you and anyone else that has made good on the opportunity to make themselves a success.
2007-11-25 07:36:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by doctdon 7
·
5⤊
2⤋
Why should someone with a 9 digit bank account pay less in taxes than someone with a 3 digit bank account? (Proportionate) In other words, if a person earning $30,000 a year is paying a larger portion of their wages in taxes than you are, this is totally unfair. I'm not very good at doing the math but I understand the concept. Some folks on here better watch who they're calling lazy!!! Some folks work just as hard, if not harder, than you! They just didn't get the right breaks or have the right connections, as those that like to run their mouth because they got lucky with the hand life dealt them. SHUT UP!!!!!
2007-11-25 07:36:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
6⤋
I cant explain it but because you worked hard for what you got the dems feel you should give it away to take care of some lazy people who have no purpose in life but to live off someone else..hope this helps
2007-11-25 07:19:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by flacrzy2 2
·
7⤊
1⤋
You don't have to do anything you don't want to do but from how you ask the question it feels like to me that you feel obligated to give which is a good feeling to have.
Remember what Jesus said to the rich man in the Bible. The rich man had kept all the Commandments in the Bible and he asked Jesus if there is anything left to do for him to make it into God's Kingdom. Jesus said that he could give away all his money to the poor but the rich man did not want to part with his money, at least not all of it, from how the story goes. People with money are always worried about their money and to worry is a sin is what Jesus said. You are supposed to rely on God for all your needs and rich people often rely on their money instead of God which puts them at a great distance from God. You say you give to a lot of causes so that is good. When you give make sure you give it and don't sit there and feel guilty after giving it. Pretent you give to God every good gift you give and don't tell people you gave because Jesus said to keep your giving secret between you and God. If you don't keep it secret then you would want to boast your giving in front of mankind and that is wrong in Jeuss's mind. All things you have, even the money, comes from God and how you use it is being watched by God. Do the best you can is what Jesus said to do so if you do that then keep doing that and thank God for every time you can give and do a good deed. If your family is ill buy a good juicer and make them homemade juices and they should get better fast. They need the enzymes from God's fruit to make them well and one can only get well with fresh fruit juice homemade because it is full of God's enzymes (enzymes are the cells of life). And in addition to all I told you keep praying every day about everything on your mind including your money and don't give up on praying no matter what. Eventually, if your heart is right with God, you will part with all your money that you don't need, and you will become one of God's closest children/friends. I hope so. I will pray for you.
2007-11-25 09:40:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Marina C 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
teddy roosevelt had too many brandies and cigars when he uttered that silly quote.the redistribution of wealth is communist dogma adopted by the elite liberals to screw you and the rest of us that are successful. universal health care anyone??
2007-11-25 08:46:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋