College Students Favoring Wealth Distribution Are Asked.....

Post Reply New Topic

As a real, patriotic American, I proudly pay my taxes. Granted they are low now, but I expect them to be higher in the future and I will still be happy to support my country. Why do you hate America?

If the taxes are going up because the people who govern us are base, stupid, short-sighted, venal and incompetent why are you so cheerful about paying even more. You are being taken for a ride.

ruveyn

Not getting into Yale or Harvard doesn't prevent you from getting rich or becoming well off, and it certainly doesn't signal life failure. Perhaps more important, middle-class is a nice place to be if you started off in poverty.


This is potentially fairly debilitating, and I can see the reason for concern here.


Probably I shouldn't have tried to summarize from memory, rather than quote you.

The military isn't some tiny thing that can only rarely apply, though, so 'very little' and 'none' aren't that different from my point of view.


I never claimed equality of opportunity, just pointed out a big one that is available to everyone. I could talk about scholarships, if I'd ever really used them.

I mean my taxes are low now because I have very little money. In the future I will have more money and thus pay higher taxes- as it should be.

Are you a willing victim? I never would have taken you for a masochist.

ruveyn

Hating government and politicians has become a noxious fad these days. If so many people hate politicians, why do they keep voting in the dumb f***s? Politicians aren't the reason our system is so incompetent. It's the ignorant masses and their ignorant divisive politics that is screwing everything up in this country. To be honest I'd prefer to live under a philosopher king.

Also, Orwell was not implying a tax raise. He was implying that he will make more money and thus fall into a higher income bracket.

Not everyone who goes the military route gets an education out of it. Those that do get a two-year degree more often than a four-year degree, and an associate's degree is most certainly not a path to wealth. Plenty of people in the mentioned district join the military simply because they have no other prospects.


Well, not everyone. It is uncertain if the military will accept people with an autism diagnosis, for one. I haven't found any clearly stated policy on the matter, but I have heard of cases where autistics were denied entrance into the military. Additionally there are physical requirements which not everyone can meet.

And even granting the military example... the lack of equality of opportunity is a serious problem here if we are going to claim the system is at all meritocratic.


Mostly dependent on the opportunities you already had, though, so inequality has already set in. I got loads of scholarship money. The total amount offered to me (from various institutions) probably topped half a million dollars- but I wouldn't have had a realistic chance at any of that without my upper-middle-class upbringing and the advantages it afforded me.

No, he just isn't a greedy miser with the F U I GOT MINE mentality.

No, I'm a patriot who wants to support his country. Ultimately supporting vital institutions like the government benefits all of us- the well-off most of all.

Good points.

Fad you say. I have had negative views about the U.S. government for the past 50 years and for good reason. I have noticed that if you really want to Snafu a situation, have the government run it. I stopped voting for major party candidates back in 1964 when the pinko stinko commie loving liberals vilified Barry Goldwater who was the first decent Republican I ever saw. After that I have voted libertarian knowing full well my vote was being thrown away.

Instead of Goldwater we got LBJ who was a crook, a swindler and a screw up. He got us into a war that cost 60,000 American lives and it was for nothing. Fortunately Landslide Lyndon only lasted one term. Then we got Dick Nixon followed by Jimmy Carter (forget Geral Ford, he was just a replacement). I hope you see my point about venality and incompetence. It is manifestly the case.

That last half way decent president I have ever known was Harry Truman. And he was only -half way decent-.

ruveyn

What was wrong with Ike?

I've come up with another way to illustrate why the sharing GPA story is so flawed.

For this story we have Smith and Jones, who enter a competition to decide who will get the top job, A, which pays $200,000 per year. If the winner amasses 90 points or more, the job is a lock. If not, he will probably still get it, but it is not promised. The loser may or may not be offered Job B, which pays $50,000.

Over the next two years Smith and Jones enter various stages of competition, and immediately before the last competition, Smith has amassed 75 points, and Jones 50. If Smith wins the final competition, he will have the 90 points it takes to be certain he is offered Job A. If he does not, he will finish with less than 90 points. If Jones wins the final competition, he will still have significantly less points than Smith, and odds are extremely good that Smith will still be offered Job A.

The night before the final competition, Smith is told that he must chose between two options.

Option 1: He can transfer 10 of his points to Jones, making it absolutely essential that he win the next competition to stay ahead in points, and making it nearly certain that he will still fall short of the 90 point goal. It also becomes possible for Jones to move ahead in total points if Jones wins big.

Option 2: He can accept a permanent tax of 30% on all his job earnings.

Which option do you think Smith will take?

GPA's are about possibilities, about showing what you are capable of to people who do not yet know what you are capable of. Transferring that to someone who has not earned it distorts the picture, making you look less capable and the other guy more than is reality, and hurts your chances of being seen as having the correct worth. Earnings, however, are a done deal. Your value has been set, for the most part. You can share a part of it and still be relatively secure in your future, and your own comfort. You don't risk your future earning power by sharing.

Sure, there are gamblers who would take Option 1, being completely sure of their ability to win that competition and Job A, allowing them to keep all of their future salary. But most people, I believe, would pick Option 2, which allows them to secure their future, even if they will make less.

Asking students to share their GPA is asking them to take Option 1, when they would rather pick Option 2.

If I'm not mistaken, the "GPA Story" was originally a politically-oriented parable, and it went something like this:

...

A young teenage girl was about to finish her first year of college. She considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat but her father was a rather staunch Republican.

One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to taxes and welfare programs. He stopped her and asked her how she was doing in school.

She answered that she had a 4.0 GPA but it was really tough. She had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party. She didn't have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying.

He asked, "How is your friend Mary?"

She replied that Mary was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, but was very popular on campus, went to all the parties all the time. Why she often didn't show up for classes because she was hung over.

Dad then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and ask the Dean to take 1.0 off her 4.0 and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a 3.0 GPA.

The daughter angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine and Mary has done nothing!"

The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party".

...

For the record, I am neither a Democrat or a Republican - I declare "No Political Affiliation" at the polls.

To a point. But when 90% of my wealthy clients are saying, "enough already, raise my taxes!," well, maybe they are more willing than you would think.

It's actually pretty simple. My wealthy clients know that their fortunes ride on a whole variety of factors, including a healthy government, strong infrastructure, and keeping the poor happy enough to not riot, among other things. They would rather pay taxes than see it all tumble down the tubes, and they have been around the block enough to know that there is only so far budget cuts can take you (everyone has to spend money to make money, and that includes government). They also know that they paid more taxes a short dozen years ago, and it didn't stop them from amassing wealth, so as much as they cheered the Bush tax cuts, they've seen what has happened since, and the scale has tipped towards thinking that those cuts weren't such a great idea.

The problem is going to be in the definition of wealthy. $250,000 may be pretty nice in the mid west, but around here that isn't going to get you past a pretty basic life style; it's just enough to buy the average price home at $750,000, and that is for a basic 1800 square footer on a small lot. A friend of mine who is otherwise very liberal, recently talked my ear off about that line, telling me that her and her husband together earn $400,000 a year, and reminding me that I know they aren't living high on the hog (nicer than me, but still not what most people would consider rich; she's right). So the geographic differences are a big sticking point in all these discussions, and probably always will be. But, I think people who live on the coasts are so used to it that after they've ranted and rumbled for a while, they'll just deal, same as they always have.

Hence why we need more brackets. The over-$250,000 crowd could probably stand a bit of a tax hike, but if we create additional brackets at $500,000, $1,000,000, $5,000,000, etc, we can make a smoother progression of marginal tax rates to avoid hitting the "slightly-rich" as hard as the obscenely wealthy.