Page 2 of 6 [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Cap on wealth a person can earn/money they can control yay or nay?
Yes 25%  25%  [ 7 ]
No 61%  61%  [ 17 ]
Maybe 14%  14%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 28

Antrax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,639
Location: west coast

22 Nov 2020, 4:14 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
Antrax wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
TheRobotLives wrote:
What good will shuffling wealth among rich people do?

The capped person sells the capped wealth to lesser rich people.

Instead of 1 billionaire, now you have 100-1000 multi-millionaires who are under the cap.

Poor people don't see a dime.


No they don't get to sell the capped wealth, they can only make so much and everything else has to go to the state, which in effect could contribute to the universal basic income payments all the poor would get. Like they get no say in how the money that goes over the cap gets used(outside of public services and things they vote for), they aren't allowed to control that much money. Its not just a you cannot personally own this much money so you can just pander it off to your rich family...not its you would not get to control that amount of money it would go to the state. So no more just pumping your kids and relatives up with trust funds.....that just goes to the state instead.

Yes its wealth distribution, and no I am not against the idea of wealth distribution.


The problem as always is no incentive to make money over the cap. Private investment dries up so all investment has to be done by government, which is famously less effective at figuring out what ideas are good to invest in. You also concentrate an enormous amount of power in the government which becomes ripe for abuse if unscrupulous orange men gain control of it.


Well there should not be incentive to make money over the cap...like I am saying get rid of capitalism. f**k this profit motivated mindset, like maybe the earth people are just ferringhi, just smaller ears and woman actually have the right to wear clothes. But other than that....


Well incentives do matter. I could say a lot more, but really that's what it really comes down to.


_________________
"Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power."


Udinaas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2020
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 557

22 Nov 2020, 10:39 am

Cap how much executives and shareholders can make compared to employees; don't cap the overall amount they can make. That would redistribute wealth while preserving profit motive.



Udinaas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2020
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 557

22 Nov 2020, 10:50 am

Ideally there would be strong unions and majority employee ownership of stocks but that would be a start.



Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,832
Location: New York City (Queens)

22 Nov 2020, 11:17 am

Redd_Kross wrote:
Pay politicians on a fixed ratio of 2x the average income of the nation, and watch that average go up, and wage inequality go down. To help themselves they'd have to help everyone else, first.

Make that the median, not the average.

If a few billionnaires make more money, but no one else makes more money, then the average will still go up, but the median won't.


_________________
- Autistic in NYC - Resources and new ideas for the autistic adult community in the New York City metro area.
- My life as one of the many belatedly-diagnosed autistic older people.
- Queens discussion group on Meetup.com.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,286

22 Nov 2020, 12:10 pm



Generally Speaking, Anyway, When And With Well Balanced Folks at least,

Make Enough Money to Meet All Needs And What Commonly Brings Joy
For those Capable of 'That Kind of Thing'; Money No Longer Holds Any Extra Value;

Yet Yes, An Intrinsic Reward of Increasing Complexity Lights up Our Inner Human
Being Evolving With Greater Satisfaction than Money Will Ever Dream of Unless We Dream

iT iS
All
We
Value;

Capitalism is Truly Nuts;
In Fact, A Squirrel; A Chipmunk; Humans
TaKinG And HoARDinG EnTiRELY TOO MUCH

Humans in Small Enough Groups Still Now

Forage Together; Work and PLaY ToGeTHeR

For Giving Thanks Giving Sharing MosT NoW

Toward the Common Now of Survive And Thrive too....

We aRe Spoon-Fed These Other Illusions From Another Birth

Culture Creates From Birth

Yet the Square Root

One Problem

Is Humans are

Not Evolved to Live

in Insanely Large Heterogenous

Groups of More than 150 to 200 or so

oF A Village Mostly Naked And Extended

Family With Truly Loving Helping Hands...

When 'STuFF' Gets too Big

Humans Tend to

Shut Down

And No

Longer Even
Truly See What is
Around them; Filtering

Out the Rest for Simple
Basic Survival; TRYinG ITs Best
to Find A Homeostasis of Balance....

And then, THere Are Those Who Never Find the
Ability to Generate Their Own Happiness Within;
They Become Addicted to Endless Sources of External
Resources Beyond Food And Drink And Shelter and Common Love


To Find A Way
Out of Empty
Within; THerefore,

And Thereof, Now The
MeME THeMe oF Trump
And All That Is Associated
From A Human With So Much
Poverty They Have No Clue How
To Generate Their Own Peace of Mind
And Happiness Without Some External Fix

To fill
what
Will
Never
be Filled
Within until
Do It Yourself
Becomes the Richness
of Happiness, Joy, and Peace Within...

It Doesn't Come With Instant Gratification...

It Comes When Boot Camp Becomes Joy Now;
Yet, Only When Fear and Apathy is not part of the mix...

It's not that folks are too Un-Intelligent in Potential to
Do this, Overall, Certainly As This Is Naturally What Every
Animal Is Evolved to Do; Not Only Survive; Yet, Thrive Now too...

How Do 'You' Turn the
'Titanic' Around When
Close to The Majority
Or The Majority of Humans
Are Lost and Empty Within Now
To Find These Natural Existential
Intelligences In Riches of Mastering
What Lives Within; Short Answer: 'You' Do Not.

Most of the Titanic is Headed Toward 'the Iceberg'

In 'Your' Case, You Don't Have to Be Part of the Titanic

At Least Until it Hits the IceBerg And All the Stuff of the 'Fan' Hits

'You' too...

Yes, more
Specifically
Me as i Got
This S Figured out...

Hehe.. Yeah the
MeMe And TheMe
of the Nietzsche Associated
Super Normal Human Part Just
Getting Back to the Basics of Nature Naked Free...

Honestly, my FRiEnD, A Cap on Ignorance of Human
Existential Intelligences Will Help the Most; Yet IT's Worth
Noting in the Last Human Renaissance Less than 5 Percent

OF An Overall
Population
Participated
Then; Although
Big Difference Now;
Free Flow of Information;
THere Are Many Many Ways
to Unplug From 'This Matrix'
As LonG As Peace Lasts before
The WHole OF 'THIS Titanic' Hits the
Iceberg and the Other S Flies Around and Hits

Everyone

And

Potentially

Everything then...

But Again A Lot Easier

To Do This Naturally Naked

And Financially Independent Now

Back to Square Root one Problem

Financial Independence; True Freedom

From the Western Civilization God of Money;

Yet, Very Nature of this Neon God In Sounds of

Ignorant Silence Requires 'the Slaves' to Continue to Slave

Away From And For 'This Green Neon God of Money' As 'They'

Are Silenced

By 'the

Overlords

oF iGnorance'

As The New

Green God

Of Money

is Temporarily Neon
Orange for Now

Until that Part

is Flushed away

Lending A Bit More

Grace, Perhaps Before

The Titanic Runs ITs

Natural Self-fulfilling Pace in Place...

NoW i Mean Seriously; if A Country is not

Smart Enough to Wear A MasK iN A Pandemic

To Save Their Closest Elder Loved ones WHere

Grandma and Grandpa are Traditionally Vaulted

In Esteem Around the Roast Thanks Giving Beast...

The Creek

is High

And

Filled with

The Not So Nice iGNoRanCE
S iNDeeD Face Palm Forests Thick...

Money We Will Not Eat; Money Is No Intelligence at All...

Meh; These Are Just Leaves Falling For Winter Spring Colors for me...

Silent

Falling

Falling

As Roses Still
Grow Great With
THoRNS AND FLoWeRS
iN 'Finely' Crafted HuMaN ORaNGE MaNuRE...

In A Country of Neon Empty Green/Orange Gods; THere
Will Never Be A Cap On Wealth, Until What is Empty Within

Comes Filled

To Individually

Be Among the

Masses Far Away from 'Church'
And 'State' Holding Hands As Always
With Demagogues of Priests, Stories, And Politicians/Minions Same...

Yeah... Yeah... i Still Go to Church; Ignore the MaNuRE; And Do the Uplifting
SonG as iT iS MuSiC That Counts Most And Particularly Words of Dance And

Songs Like 'Sounds

Of' 'Silence' BRinGS

Some Days The 'Associated Minions' Even Hold

"A Village Dancing Singing Sacred Clown's Hand"

At Least Before Covid-19 Pandemic From the

Ignorance of Human Cultures Invading Taking

And Hoarding Away Other Wild Life HaBiTaTS Still Now

And True At the Dance Hall So Much More Than 'Church';

Yet, DisturbinG iT iS; Yet, FaiR We CREaTE Or Do NoToGeTHeR...

-Yoda
Or Just
ANoTHER
NoBody Like 'That'...

With Sounds of Silence Falling
aS Once Again Fall Leaves Become
Winter Spring Summer FLoWeRS AGAiN Ever Green..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,606
Location: Stendec

22 Nov 2020, 12:30 pm

No.

Allow this to happen, and those in charge will make the usual exemptions for themselves while imposing strict limits on the rest of us, resulting in none but a few people being able to afford things like nutritious food, secure housing, adequate medical care, and advanced education.

Sure, the system would not be much different than the way it is now, but at least those who are both able and willing can still find some means to better themselves.

Under an income cap, benefits outside of regular income would still be counted as income. Life-saving surgery? Forget it. You have already exceeded your cap.


_________________
*TRE45ON!!*
Lock Him Up!

(Claiming moral equivalency between immoral acts is a null defense.)


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,130
Location: Scandinavia

22 Nov 2020, 1:14 pm

No.

While certain mechanisms need to be in place to prevent the rich from abusing their power (for example to prevent a corporation from becoming a government in it's own right), the government should not be allowed to steal.

The government's power should be limited; nobody climbs to the top of politics honestly. Politics is a game that favours sociopathic and narcisistic personality traits, and people like that should not be allowed to rule over the common man. I'm all for filthy rich people paying more taxes, but that's a different subject.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


Mountain Goat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,654
Location: Wales,UK Relationship: Single Interests: Trains AgeGroup: 40's FavouriteColor: Green Music: CyndiLauper Pets: Cats and Ducks

22 Nov 2020, 1:49 pm

The problem is if wealth is capped then you have a form of communism whereby people are not free to use their tallents to progress above a certain point. In some communistic countries where they can't progress, they don't bother and the countries can have difficulties into getting workers to work in the tougher jobs. (Why do hard work to earn when you can do easy work in another job to earn the same pay?) So it in turn leads to the negative aspects of communiam and that is forced labour because if it was not forced, they would not bother at all.

Don't get me wrong. The idea that people can earn more then they have time to spend it may have a moral status if they decide to keep it when others could be starving around them, but it would be wrong to say to the rich person "You must part with some of your wealth because".... and why this is wrong, because in most countries in the western world they pay far more taxes then any one of us. So where is the fault? The fault lies with successive poor governmental management systems which do not allow people to thrive from their own tallents at the lower end. Any country that relies on charities to feed and help the poor is jot doing their jobs properly at a government level. (I am not saying that it is easy. But my Dad was right when he said that as a governments job is to provide a system that a country can work and look after its people and make ways in which its people can thrive).

Consider this. Lets say I was in charge of a country and I tried my own system out (And I do not know if it will work but lets give the theory a go and lets assume we are starting with a clean slate).
Now I know that the country does need a form of government to make it work and to build a transport structure along with all the associated services and healthcare. So to run this I tax everyone 10% on their profits but I allow them to just go ahead and do what they want to do to make themselves an income.
Now 10% does not seem a lot, but think about it. Why doesn't 10% work? If it is a nice easy figure to work out I need fewer tax experts to raise and work out the money, and for the people, they will be less likely to try to avoid paying as it is easy to work out and easy to pay.
Now also, add to this is the fact that people do not need to earn themselves so much money in the first place to survive, and those who can't work will be supported by the government easier because there will be far more enthusiastic people paying their 10% because it is easy to work out and pay.
Now many things we have are not needed for a government to run, but they can be run in the private sector. Here in Britain Libraries used to be private and those who used them would pay to borrow books. Many such small business ventures will spring up.
I also feel that with motor cars, as they have to be insured, that governmwnts should do a minimum insurance at a not for profit cost, so all motorists can have basic insurance at a basic price, BUT anyone who wants to set up a more comprehensive insurance scheme beyond this should be willing to do so.
One thing I would not want to see is stocks and shares, as the system has done more harm then good. It is like gambling. (Another concept I would not allow).
But basically I would want a government with few laws, but the laws that are there will be enforced and adhered to.

I think it would work. :)


_________________
Awaiting asessment. Neurodiverse 173/200. Neurotypical 21/200. Empathy 11/80. AQ 39.
Shutdown link: --》 I can relate: --》
Shutdown Experience similar to mine: --》


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,587

22 Nov 2020, 2:07 pm

Well, the concept of "wealth" is not very well-defined, and a wealth cap could thus be subverted through an ingenious multitude of opaque financial and legal instruments. Of course, one could try to keep tabs on them by hiring lawyers, but you need wealth to pay for the best lawyers...

And the billionaires of today could simply switch to other types of privileges, exemptions, prerogatives, favours, honours, charters etc. (which were extensively used in the past by the clergy and nobility, for instance) that provide economic benefits without being "wealth" in the modern sense (=money in a bank account).

In the end, the # 1 rule of money is this: Anything which performs the function of money *is* money.


_________________
Omit needless words.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,688
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Nov 2020, 2:22 pm

Fnord wrote:
No.

Allow this to happen, and those in charge will make the usual exemptions for themselves while imposing strict limits on the rest of us, resulting in none but a few people being able to afford things like nutritious food, secure housing, adequate medical care, and advanced education.

Sure, the system would not be much different than the way it is now, but at least those who are both able and willing can still find some means to better themselves.

Under an income cap, benefits outside of regular income would still be counted as income. Life-saving surgery? Forget it. You have already exceeded your cap.


It would not be an income cap as such that a person would be denied life saving surgery, there would be univarsal health care so you wouldn't have to purchase the surgery in the first place. It would be as such a single individual cannot control multiple billions of dollars probably the only people who would notice a difference would be the wealthiest people. I mean once a person has multiple millions what more could they possibly need to 'better' themselves.


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,688
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Nov 2020, 2:30 pm

Mountain Goat wrote:
The problem is if wealth is capped then you have a form of communism whereby people are not free to use their tallents to progress above a certain point. In some communistic countries where they can't progress, they don't bother and the countries can have difficulties into getting workers to work in the tougher jobs. (Why do hard work to earn when you can do easy work in another job to earn the same pay?) So it in turn leads to the negative aspects of communiam and that is forced labour because if it was not forced, they would not bother at all.

Don't get me wrong. The idea that people can earn more then they have time to spend it may have a moral status if they decide to keep it when others could be starving around them, but it would be wrong to say to the rich person "You must part with some of your wealth because".... and why this is wrong, because in most countries in the western world they pay far more taxes then any one of us. So where is the fault? The fault lies with successive poor governmental management systems which do not allow people to thrive from their own tallents at the lower end. Any country that relies on charities to feed and help the poor is jot doing their jobs properly at a government level. (I am not saying that it is easy. But my Dad was right when he said that as a governments job is to provide a system that a country can work and look after its people and make ways in which its people can thrive).

Consider this. Lets say I was in charge of a country and I tried my own system out (And I do not know if it will work but lets give the theory a go and lets assume we are starting with a clean slate).
Now I know that the country does need a form of government to make it work and to build a transport structure along with all the associated services and healthcare. So to run this I tax everyone 10% on their profits but I allow them to just go ahead and do what they want to do to make themselves an income.
Now 10% does not seem a lot, but think about it. Why doesn't 10% work? If it is a nice easy figure to work out I need fewer tax experts to raise and work out the money, and for the people, they will be less likely to try to avoid paying as it is easy to work out and easy to pay.
Now also, add to this is the fact that people do not need to earn themselves so much money in the first place to survive, and those who can't work will be supported by the government easier because there will be far more enthusiastic people paying their 10% because it is easy to work out and pay.
Now many things we have are not needed for a government to run, but they can be run in the private sector. Here in Britain Libraries used to be private and those who used them would pay to borrow books. Many such small business ventures will spring up.
I also feel that with motor cars, as they have to be insured, that governmwnts should do a minimum insurance at a not for profit cost, so all motorists can have basic insurance at a basic price, BUT anyone who wants to set up a more comprehensive insurance scheme beyond this should be willing to do so.
One thing I would not want to see is stocks and shares, as the system has done more harm then good. It is like gambling. (Another concept I would not allow).
But basically I would want a government with few laws, but the laws that are there will be enforced and adhered to.

I think it would work. :)


I am not suggesting everyone gets the exact same pay.

And no there is actually a gigantic problem of the wealthiest people doing anything they can to worm their way out of paying their fair share.

Also, if anything I think even less things should be privatized such as healthcare.


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


Mountain Goat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,654
Location: Wales,UK Relationship: Single Interests: Trains AgeGroup: 40's FavouriteColor: Green Music: CyndiLauper Pets: Cats and Ducks

22 Nov 2020, 2:31 pm

There is another issue with capping, or highly taxing the rich. In general the rich bring in more tax into the country then many poor do put together as the rich earn more. If one taxes the rich higher or if one caps what they can earn, one risks loosing the rich to other countries who will not oeanalize them so much, and the more rich one looses the poorer ones country becomes where the poorer people have to be taxed more to compensate. So one need to keep the rich just as much as one needs everyone else, as everyone is valueable.


_________________
Awaiting asessment. Neurodiverse 173/200. Neurotypical 21/200. Empathy 11/80. AQ 39.
Shutdown link: --》 I can relate: --》
Shutdown Experience similar to mine: --》


Mountain Goat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,654
Location: Wales,UK Relationship: Single Interests: Trains AgeGroup: 40's FavouriteColor: Green Music: CyndiLauper Pets: Cats and Ducks

22 Nov 2020, 2:44 pm

Healthcare...

Here in Britain it is usually free but there are two egatives to a free system.

1. Long waiting lists.

2. The drug companies start to work together and they keep raizing the prices of the drugs knowing that the health system has to pay for it, and due to this somw drug prices have gone up thousands of percent where under a private healthcare system country, many companies compete so the prices are a lot cheaper.
We do have private healthcare in Britain but it is very highly prices due to it being a bit if a monopoly. To add to the insult, many forced to go private because of the long waiting lists find they are operated on in the same government hospitals and by the same surgeons that they would have if they were able to wait. Some of the aaiting lists are because the system allows the private healthcare to have priority, thus under our system, the rich who can afford private healthcare can get to queuejump and be seen almost straight away. My Dad used to say private should be totally seperate to government run hospitals and he is right. It is not that both can't help each other as at the end of the day patients health comes first, but they should not out of normal circumstances use the surgeons and staff that were trained by the government at the governments expense, and the hospitals that our taxpayers have paid for to do the proceedures unless it is an emergency where it can't be avoided.

But I have heard of a system that is interesting and is used in Korea and other Far Eastern countries. They have private healthcare but what is different is that they pay when they are well, but if they are unwell they get treated for free, so it is within the interests of the health companies to make sure their patients are well. It is not ideal as somepatients may never be well etc, but it is an interesting concept which may work better then others.


_________________
Awaiting asessment. Neurodiverse 173/200. Neurotypical 21/200. Empathy 11/80. AQ 39.
Shutdown link: --》 I can relate: --》
Shutdown Experience similar to mine: --》


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,688
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Nov 2020, 3:00 pm

Mountain Goat wrote:
There is another issue with capping, or highly taxing the rich. In general the rich bring in more tax into the country then many poor do put together as the rich earn more. If one taxes the rich higher or if one caps what they can earn, one risks loosing the rich to other countries who will not oeanalize them so much, and the more rich one looses the poorer ones country becomes where the poorer people have to be taxed more to compensate. So one need to keep the rich just as much as one needs everyone else, as everyone is valueable.


Well than perhaps Globalism would solve that...eventually there would not be any countries, for them to run to.


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


Mountain Goat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,654
Location: Wales,UK Relationship: Single Interests: Trains AgeGroup: 40's FavouriteColor: Green Music: CyndiLauper Pets: Cats and Ducks

22 Nov 2020, 3:10 pm

The problem with that is why bother to prosper? That in itself will collapse large industries which employ people as they will rech a point where their owners will reach the cap and just give up.


_________________
Awaiting asessment. Neurodiverse 173/200. Neurotypical 21/200. Empathy 11/80. AQ 39.
Shutdown link: --》 I can relate: --》
Shutdown Experience similar to mine: --》


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,130
Location: Scandinavia

22 Nov 2020, 3:24 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Well, the concept of "wealth" is not very well-defined, and a wealth cap could thus be subverted through an ingenious multitude of opaque financial and legal instruments. Of course, one could try to keep tabs on them by hiring lawyers, but you need wealth to pay for the best lawyers...

And the billionaires of today could simply switch to other types of privileges, exemptions, prerogatives, favours, honours, charters etc. (which were extensively used in the past by the clergy and nobility, for instance) that provide economic benefits without being "wealth" in the modern sense (=money in a bank account).

In the end, the # 1 rule of money is this: Anything which performs the function of money *is* money.


That's basically how cryptocurrencies work.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”