Obama will be speaking to all the school children of America this week

[Quail_Antwerp]

My point is, if they didn't work for it, they didn't earn it.

I'm all for helping out someone in need, but we shouldn't force people to give up what they worked for just because someone else needs it more than they do.

 

[MorelCabin]

Should someone who worked hard for their money, earned their millions, and made something of themselves be forced to share their money? Give it to someone who needs it just because they (rich) aren't using it? That's like giving an "A" to a student who didn't study, pay attention in class, or take notes at all. Let's just give that kid the same grade that the A students actually worked for.

How is that the same? People do not die of not having an 'A'.

People do OTOH die of things like starvation, lack of basic medical care, lack of shelter or heat. Usually not for reasons that are in any way their "fault".

And even when they don't die, their children and their children's children get sucked into a squalid cycle from which it can often be darn close to impossible to escape.

It's not a competition, it's not a hobby, it is LIFE, and PEOPLE.

Life is not always fair. That's a given - it cannot always be fair. Personally, I think that when there is a clash of two things that cannot both be equally fair, helping those in serious need should win out.

The folks I've known and seen, who really need help, are not in their current circumstances because they are lazy (your "didn't study, pay attention in class, or take notes"). In many cases, there but for the grace of God go any one of us.

<shrug>

Pat

Well, I can say I see both ends of this situation and as a single mother a long time ago, lived it too. People often make choices in life that end them up where they are, or in my case, where I was...
I totally agree with Quail on her side, but Pat I do realize that there are many out there who end up there quite by accident. I can't say I believe that we should take from the rich and give to the poor, that just reminds me of the many generations of welfare families we have in our cities who *do* play the game and will never amount to anything simply because they don't have to.
I do however strongly believe that we should help the elderly and there really really should be short term help available to all, just not the way it is done now.

 

[FarmerChick]

I hate this term---re-distrubting of wealth

It can apply to so many situations!l

Our taxes take care of the poor already. that is part of the tax monies spent. There are tons of programs "the poor" can be eligible for already.

I am not into taking from the rich cause "they just so happen to have money"-----the nation must be fair in taxing etc. It can not take from some cause they have more. That is not what any country should be about....a few support the nation.

I am not saying do not help...we do already....there will never, ever, be exact complete wealth for all on the same level. It will never happen.

And to me it must work down the line...the govt. already contributes our tax dollars to help---then the state kicks in---then the counties kick in---the the local people kick in and support their needy. It comes down to tons of help usually for people.

"the poor" and everyone deserve basic rights and food and survival. I believe they are getting it mostly as is this whole nation.

I hate when "others spend money that isn't theirs"---just cause others have it and some don't. Keep your hands in your own pockets. Our pockets are getting very empty already. Even the rich have limited funds.

 

[me&thegals]

Would ya'll please explain to me what you are meaning be redistributing wealth???

If you're meaning that of a "Robin Hood" ideal, take from the rich and give to the poor, then I ask why?

Should someone who worked hard for their money, earned their millions, and made something of themselves be forced to share their money? Give it to someone who needs it just because they (rich) aren't using it?

That's like giving an "A" to a student who didn't study, pay attention in class, or take notes at all. Let's just give that kid the same grade that the A students actually worked for.

Everyone complains about people living on Welfare and not working for what they have...um, wouldn't taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor be just about the same thing?

Oh, you've a million extra dollars in the bank you've not used. We're going to take that and give it to the lazy bum down the road because he earned it by breathing the same air as you.

Why is there always this dichotomy of "Deserving, Hard-Working, Honest, White Rich Guy" versus, "Poor Lazy Bum." What? Are all the wealthy really deserving? Did none of them inherit it, hard working or not? Did none of them scalp their employees to get rich themselves? Did none of them pay tax attorneys to weasle out of every little bit of tax they could? Did none of them raid our 401-Ks, our pensions, our health insurance plans?

As for the Poor Lazy Bum, does he have his physical and mental health? Was he born into a minority group with possible discrimination? Did he have a family to fall back on in hard times? Did he have a decent neighborhood and public school? Did he have enough to eat in utero, in childhood, in adulthood? Was he in an economically depressed occupation/area? Did he ever run up against Mr. Rich Guy who paid him crappy wages, gave him crappy hours, did not give him health insurance or gave him crappy health insurance, raided his 401-K, did not protect him from job hazards, etc.

Ok--a bit of a stark contrast, I admit. But I am very, very sick and tired of hearing the Deserving Rich Dude versus the Lazy Bum argument. There are many reasons and ways for people to become rich or poor.

For many of us, basic human decency does not allow us to turn away from needy people, however they got there. As for those of you who disagree, I really, really hope you never find yourselves in the position of needing a bit of a hand up. It will be really, really difficult to swallow your pride.

 

[FarmerChick]

there are tons of programs out there to help

people help people in their communities

and rich people, however they got their money, never means anyone can just "take more" cause someone else might need "something more" then they are already receiving and are eligible for from the govt. and private charity organizations.

the poor are in their status for whatever reason and poor pay taxes like everyone else to help "the truly deserving poor who have nothing and maybe disabilities and all that"

the struggling middle class slob who foots tons of taxes for tons of govt. agencies to handle these problems are in their status for "however long"

the rich are in their status for whatever reason who foot tons of taxes to handle national problems

one DOES not mean the other can just take...no matter what the reasons are...

wow...talk about f'ing on the constitutional rights of some to prosper.

 

[me&thegals]

I'm not sure what you're talking about, especially the last line. I am talking about tax structure. I don't believe that someone who earns $20,000/year should pay as much % in taxes as someone earning $100,000. And someone earning millions has SO MUCH more $ above basic living needs, that he/she can definitely afford to pick up extra slack.

Imagine a kindergarten class where some kids have no cookies, some a few, others entire boxes full of cookies. Do you really think that each child should contribute the same amount of cookies (or even the same %) in order that all have some cookies?

When I was in college, I was barely making it and paid very little in taxes. Now I earn more and pay a greater % of taxes. Great. I highly doubt it, but perhaps some day I will be wealthy and would be able/willing to pay an even higher percentage of my income for taxes. After all, how much more $ above my millions would I really need? Of course, it would be thrilling to see that tax $ spent well and efficiently. Or, maybe I would be really cool and set up foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, where they actually carefully research where their $ goes and track its progress. That is about the only reason I can think of for wanting to be excessively rich.

 

[FarmerChick]

I am just throwing out thoughts in general basically. wasn't really responding to your post.

what I am just trying to say, is everyone pays their taxes as set by the govt. I don't feel like people should be out gunning for the rich just because "they have cash"--it is their money. Not anyone elses.





How many more millions do you need? That is personal to you.

Someone who has 50 mil in the bank in cash does not have to donate one dime to charity if they do not wish. I see no problem with this. It is theirs and theirs alone.



But no I don't think cause someone has alot more they should be picking up any more slack. Just cause they have money is no reason to step on their rights to their own income. Yes tax as it should be in tax brackets obviously, but to "add" a little more tax to this scale cause they have more is just plain legal robbery and would be a crime to me. It is discrimination pure and simple.

You can not take "extra" from millionaires cause it "just so happens the money is there"---it is not anyone's to "take a little extra"

 

[me&thegals]

Yes tax as it should be in tax brackets obviously, but to "add" a little more tax to this scale cause they have more is just plain legal robbery and would be a crime to me. It is discrimination pure and simple.

You can not take "extra" from millionaires cause it "just so happens the money is there"---it is not anyone's to "take a little extra"

Just 2 more points:

1. ALL tax codes are manmade. They flex back and forth with different administrations and Congresses. They are not carved in stone.

2. Societies that have the largest gaps between the very richest and the very poorest tend to be quite unstable.

 

[FarmerChick]

yea I know the tax base
It has to be fair for every citizen.

You can not just "take extra, slap on another 5% or whatever to "some" cause they have more. You can't just add and add and add more percetage to a certain group of people. It is robbery and discrimination.

while I know what you mean on the second point.....you can not steal "extra" from a millionaire class to "fix" a national problem and think this would ever be legal. You can not rob the rich to give to the poor over what is their reasonable fair amt. to pay.

You can not steal from a group of individuals because they have more money. Their fair share is enough. After that the nation should not be a thief and take others earned money ---just because they have it.

It is amazing that I see people wanting to tax the wealthier class with tons of higher taxes just because "the nation and the poor need some money"----will never fly with me ever!

 

[Quail_Antwerp]

Why is there always this dichotomy of "Deserving, Hard-Working, Honest, White Rich Guy" versus, "Poor Lazy Bum." What? Are all the wealthy really deserving? Did none of them inherit it, hard working or not? Did none of them scalp their employees to get rich themselves? Did none of them pay tax attorneys to weasle out of every little bit of tax they could? Did none of them raid our 401-Ks, our pensions, our health insurance plans?

I don't know if they are all really deserving, hardworking, or that they're even white. I'm just saying no one has the right to take money just to take it because they think someone else should have it. I believe money is worthless, not even worth the paper it's printed on, if it doesn't have the gold to back it.

If it gets to the point of bartering, like some of us believe this country is headed (because I for one believe we're in for another depression, worse than the Great Depression), would you want the Goverment to come to your home and say, "Oh hey, look! You've a whole pantry of food! We're going to take it and distribute it to the public as we see fit, and you're going to have to stand in line for your share."

So for this scenario to work, lets say money is gone, and Food is the new dollar. Would you want them to come and force you to give up most of what you put up and worked for, putting your family in the same boat as the next family who lived the fast life and never canned anything or planted a garden? Wouldn't you rather have the right to choose to donate your food on your own accord? (which I'm sure you would, given the passion you've shown for the less fortunate and that's a good!)

As for the Poor Lazy Bum, does he have his physical and mental health? Was he born into a minority group with possible discrimination? Did he have a family to fall back on in hard times? Did he have a decent neighborhood and public school? Did he have enough to eat in utero, in childhood, in adulthood? Was he in an economically depressed occupation/area? Did he ever run up against Mr. Rich Guy who paid him crappy wages, gave him crappy hours, did not give him health insurance or gave him crappy health insurance, raided his 401-K, did not protect him from job hazards, etc.

How about maybe the Poor Lazy Bum is just that. He lives with a sense of "I deserve it because I breathe" and thinks everything should be handed to him without ever working for it.

Ok--a bit of a stark contrast, I admit. But I am very, very sick and tired of hearing the Deserving Rich Dude versus the Lazy Bum argument. There are many reasons and ways for people to become rich or poor.

I agree, there are many ways people become rich or poor, but that still doesn't make it right to forcefully take from one to give to the other. Would you rather be given a hand out or know that you earned what you are getting?

For many of us, basic human decency does not allow us to turn away from needy people, however they got there. As for those of you who disagree, I really, really hope you never find yourselves in the position of needing a bit of a hand up. It will be really, really difficult to swallow your pride.

I think no matter how I reply to this, you won't have any respect for me or my opinions, assuming you have any respect for me now, so I'll just put myself out there.

My husband and I had lucrative money flowing through our fingers a few years back. We were not poor. Then he got hurt. Try going from being well off to nothing. We're there. Like Farmerchick said, though, there are programs out there to help people temporarily when they need it. There's time limits to the programs, yes, but that's because it's not supposed to be a permanent way of life. It's supposed to give you some temporary relief while you work to do better for yourself.

I also want to add, we didn't just run to the welfare office as soon as he got hurt. We used up our savings first, then we sold our fancy cars. We survived for almost 2 years on what we'd already had before we had to ask for help. When I decided to get chickens, I didn't want to buy them with assistance money, so I sold my digital camera to buy my chickens.

How many people make leaching off the goverment a career?

Hasn't anyone ever read the story of The Little Red Hen? She did all the work, asked others to help, yes, but they didn't want to help until it was time to eat. Know who she fed? Her children.

How about The Ant and The Grasshopper? The original story, not the one Disney revised...The Grasshopper in the original story played all the time. He loafed and goofed off (much like my inlaws that lived with us). The Ant worked hard all year, stock piled all his food (a lot like SS'er's do, right?) so he wouldn't starve come winter.

In the Disney version the ant takes in the grasshopper and fed him.

In the original tale, the grasshopper starved to death and the Ant survived.

Who do you want to be? I'd rather be The Ant.

If we re-distribute the wealth, then only the rich need to work? or earn money, and the rest of us who are poor, well, we don't need to do anything, just sit back and let the rich send money our way to pay for our needs. We can sing, dance, and play, sleep till noon, not get up and do anything because Big Brother is going to make the Rich (no matter how they got to be rich) share the wealth.

Awesome.

So we shouldn't complain about the people who make a living off welfare, right?