Yeah, we sure get a lot of posts on AMT that seem to be more about being contrary than actually supporting a substantial thought. It's one thing to have a strong opinion- even if it can easily shot down- but when it's just about being argumentative- that's just a game some like to play. Personally, I don't even mind a little sarcasm but arguing for the sheer sake of arguing... ho hum, yawn.
... The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously? The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group? The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots. ... so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,759
Yeah, we sure get a lot of posts on AMT that seem to be more about being contrary than actually supporting a substantial thought. It's one thing to have a strong opinion- even if it can easily shot down- but when it's just about being argumentative- that's just a game some like to play. Personally, I don't even mind a little sarcasm but arguing for the sheer sake of arguing... ho hum, yawn.
... The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously? The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group? The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots. ... so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
Oh, totally, Cosmo. The comparison is absurd- to even suggest something like that- wow...
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Yeah, we sure get a lot of posts on AMT that seem to be more about being contrary than actually supporting a substantial thought. It's one thing to have a strong opinion- even if it can easily shot down- but when it's just about being argumentative- that's just a game some like to play. Personally, I don't even mind a little sarcasm but arguing for the sheer sake of arguing... ho hum, yawn.
... The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously? The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group? The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots. ... so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
I agree the OP was so ridiculous, it didn't merit comment. And I never was agreeing with it. I'm just against saying that anyone asks someone to pay more taxes. And also against the concept of a "fair share", which is completely unachievable. Life isn't meant to be fair.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Yeah, we sure get a lot of posts on AMT that seem to be more about being contrary than actually supporting a substantial thought. It's one thing to have a strong opinion- even if it can easily shot down- but when it's just about being argumentative- that's just a game some like to play. Personally, I don't even mind a little sarcasm but arguing for the sheer sake of arguing... ho hum, yawn.
... The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously? The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group? The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots. ... so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
I agree the OP was so ridiculous, it didn't merit comment. And I never was agreeing with it. I'm just against saying that anyone asks someone to pay more taxes. And also against the concept of a "fair share", which is completely unachievable. Life isn't meant to be fair.
Well Know1...
I'm a cold hearted cynic at the best of times, but you smoke me in this department.
Life isn't meant to be fair. What a statement. I could agree with you that life isn't fair, but I'll wholeheartedly disagree with you and suggest life is meant to be fair.
Social hierarchies are man made and preserved through systems that have been entrenched and maintained by the very people that the same hierarchies serve best. Life was never intended to be like this- it's been constructed to be like this. To say this is the way life was meant to be is one of the most defeatist attitudes I could hope to come across.
And, if such attitudes are in existence and prevalent in any significant capacity... you would be correct when you say 'fair share' is unachievable: resigning ourselves to the whim of the uber rich.
The current system that placates the 'have nots' will work for some time still, but as I mentioned in an earlier post- with history to validate it- there will be some level of revolt at some period of time. It's almost assured.
I agree the OP was so ridiculous, it didn't merit comment. And I never was agreeing with it. I'm just against saying that anyone asks someone to pay more taxes. And also against the concept of a "fair share", which is completely unachievable. Life isn't meant to be fair.
... You are against the concept of 'Fair Share'... really? You don't believe in 'Fairness'? I don't believe that. I believe you think fairness is a good human trait... like playing a fair game and giving everyone a fair shake. I believe you treat your children fairly, right? And your wife... her too. I believe you treat everyone you cross paths fairly... until they prove otherwise. That's what most of us probably do. I believe... and i may be wrong... that it is the taxes part, that get your ire, right? That you do not believe any taxes should be taken... from anyone, right? Well... that's not the real world we live in as a society of millions. If you want, go build yourself an island and live there by yourself. Then you won't have to pay taxes.. to yourself. Here is America, many of us adhere to the concepts of fairness. We also understand that by living in a society, we contribute to a shared resource because we can't do everything ourselves. We need things like streets and sewer lines and water supply systems and cops and firemen and soldiers... which.. well, at least me... I can't build and maintain a fresh water supply or fight a 3 alarm structure fire by myself. Those things cost money and we all need to share the expense. We can't all do this equally... as in, we all kick in the same amount of dollars to cover everything... so, we contribute relatively. As in, relative to our income. That is what we call, 'fair'. And a fair plan would be if we all kicked in the same percentage of what we make. You make $70K so you kick in 15% or $10,500.. someone making $32K kicks in $4800 and the guy who makes $2Million kicks in $300,000. Now, I understand that $300,000.00 is a hell of a lot more than $4800.00... but, if you are making 2 million a year... America has been really great to you. The amount is relative to what you make... that, to me, sounds fair. ... What isn't fair to most of us is the guy making 2 million, sheltering his income with fancy accounting tricks and pays less than the guy making $32,000. If you believed in fairness... i think you would agree. ... Also.. I believe you meant to say, 'Life is not fair'... it is not fair that someone, by the lottery of birth, is given life in a penthouse or life in the projects. Fairness is a Human Characteristic that is created or denied by us... Mankind.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I believe we should strive to treat people fairly, but the fact remains that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make life fair.
If it were possible, we'd look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age.
We will never, ever, ever make life truly fair and I think that tricking yourself that you can just adds to stress and frustration. Also, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring.
As for "fair share" that is a very nebulous concept that's almost impossible to define and would vary greatly from person to person if we really contemplated it.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Definition, Fair: the place where you go to eat cotton candy. life could be more equitable with a fixed percentage. break it down now, per cent... no offense, but there is nothing nebulous about it.. we all count to one hundred the same way and we all give the same amount of "units" PER CENT. how can this possibly be construed as inequitable? the only answer i have been tendered that is rational before is that the NECESSITIES of life cost a higher percentage of one's total wealth as that wealth decreases so if anything the poorer should pay a LOWER percentage than the richer.
I believe we should strive to treat people fairly, but the fact remains that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make life fair.
If it were possible, we'd look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age.
We will never, ever, ever make life truly fair and I think that tricking yourself that you can just adds to stress and frustration. Also, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring.
As for "fair share" that is a very nebulous concept that's almost impossible to define and would vary greatly from person to person if we really contemplated it.
You would do better to say, "Hey gang. I'm just playing Devil's advocate here. Yah. You guys are right- I know that, but for the sake of argument and the fact that this website is pretty quiet lately... I stuck to my really poor opinion."
When you say, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring... tell that to the kid in Africa or the women in Saudi Arabia or the minimum wage working mother of two renting a shit apartment in your country.
And, I believe it was Cosmo that pointed out the absurdity of allowing rich people to hoard their money by affording them tax breaks to circumvent paying their proportion of taxes like the guy who makes $20,000 a year does. Nobody wants more- they just want the same.
Yes... it could be stressful thinking about how the uber rich shit all over the planet and its inhabitants, but hey... I'd rather be stressed and aware of the inequities that exist instead of shoving my head up my ass and blissfully content with whatever enters my field of vision and spectrum of awareness.
I'll come back to this thread just as soon as the 1% no longer live under the same laws as everyone else, when they are not allowed to own businesses, when they aren't allowed into restaurants, when they aren't allowed to walk on the sidewalk, when they are rounded up and murdered. Until then, this idiot should just shut the fuck up. What a fucking joke.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I believe we should strive to treat people fairly, but the fact remains that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make life fair.
If it were possible, we'd look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age.
We will never, ever, ever make life truly fair and I think that tricking yourself that you can just adds to stress and frustration. Also, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring.
As for "fair share" that is a very nebulous concept that's almost impossible to define and would vary greatly from person to person if we really contemplated it.
... I think we all understand and agree that life is not fair. Those things are out of our control. We are NOT debating that. We are arguing that the rules set by humans CAN be fair... but, we CHOOSE to make the rules to favor ourselves, rather than making it fair for everyone. A very simple example is this...the rules in football are the same for both teams. The rules are not slanted for one team or the other. A touchdown is worth 6 points for all teams. It would not be fair if Denver got 20 points for a touchdown and Seattle got 4 points. Those rules are manmade and we can make things fair for both Denver and Seattle. The same would apply to the tax structure to make everyone pay the same percentage and eliminate the loopholes that allow the billionaires to pay almost nothing while the rest of us pay our shares. ... That's it. it is that simple. We are not getting into philisophical debates about concepts of life, the universe or anything. We are simply talking about rules/laws that man makes and man has complete control over. ... Also... I think you are confusing fairness with equality. If we all look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age... we would all be equal. We could be all of those things you stated... and STILL be unfair or unjust to each other, right?
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
OK. So someone explain to me how you determine someone's "fair share" and have everyone agree with it and be happy.
I just feel that "fair" is such a completely unachievable concept.
It's been explained to you. The context was 'taxes'. It was stated that everyone should pay an equal proportion of their earnings: if it's 10% for a guy who earns $20,000... then it's 10% for a guy who earns $10 million.
Not everyone has to be 'happy' about it and not everybody has to agree to it- that's not what we are discussing. We are talking about equity. Just as the rich dude can say, "Well I pay more then!"... the poor guy can say, "I don't have enough afterwards then".
OK. So someone explain to me how you determine someone's "fair share" and have everyone agree with it and be happy.
I just feel that "fair" is such a completely unachievable concept.
... I thought I did so with the whole 15% tax thing. Here... let me place in terms you might better understand. Let's say, you are married... and you have 2 kids, ages 15 and 9... and a dog. You all live in one house. You are the main bread winner and bring home an annual salary of 50K. Your wife works part time and earns 20K Your 15 year old babysits or does chores for the neighbors and makes about 500 dollars a year. The 9 year old does not work or earn any money outside the household. The dog is a dog and does what dogs do. ... Now, the operating and living expenses of the household is typical... mortgage, insurances, utilities, maintenence, food, transportation, etc... A fair share would be that you pay in a larger amount than your wife and your 15 year old, based upon your income. Your wife and kids can kick in with services. Like, your wife may handle the majority of food and enytertainment expenses with her income. You'd be a real jerk if you expected your 15 year old to use her income to pay the electric or dog food bills... but, since your 15 year old daughter makes a little money with her little side jobs, she can kick in some of her money, if she wants to... for example, she doesn't want to wear the 10 dollar Pennys jeans you buy for her, so she kicks in the difference of 30 dollars to get the 40 jeans she wants from Macys. The 9 year old may contribute by taking on household chores, such as help with yard work and walking the dog after school. If he wants the Volcom sweatshirt instead of the the generic sweatshirt you'd buy fro him from Wal-Mart, he can save up his allowance or do some extra chores around the house to make up the difference. Does that sound 'fair' to you? 'Fair Share' does NOT mean 'Equal Shares'. It does not mean you split the household finances into 4 parts and you each are expected to pay 25%. The 'Equality' part kicks in regarding the total amounts you have in order to contribute. Maybe you're not happy that you have to kick in the lion's share of the expenses... You would not be happy because you don't get to keep the money you earn... so, yeah... I'll concede that point. The difference is Fair Share is where everyone contributes to the operation of the household. ... I know you are a fairly smart guy, i really don't believe you cannot grasp that concept of 'Fair Share' as it applies to human conditions and are only arguing for the sake of arguement. ... Oh, yeah... and the dog contributes to the household by simply, being a dog.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
OK. So someone explain to me how you determine someone's "fair share" and have everyone agree with it and be happy.
I just feel that "fair" is such a completely unachievable concept.
... I thought I did so with the whole 15% tax thing. Here... let me place in terms you might better understand. Let's say, you are married... and you have 2 kids, ages 15 and 9... and a dog. You all live in one house. You are the main bread winner and bring home an annual salary of 50K. Your wife works part time and earns 20K Your 15 year old babysits or does chores for the neighbors and makes about 500 dollars a year. The 9 year old does not work or earn any money outside the household. The dog is a dog and does what dogs do. ... Now, the operating and living expenses of the household is typical... mortgage, insurances, utilities, maintenence, food, transportation, etc... A fair share would be that you pay in a larger amount than your wife and your 15 year old, based upon your income. Your wife and kids can kick in with services. Like, your wife may handle the majority of food and enytertainment expenses with her income. You'd be a real jerk if you expected your 15 year old to use her income to pay the electric or dog food bills... but, since your 15 year old daughter makes a little money with her little side jobs, she can kick in some of her money, if she wants to... for example, she doesn't want to wear the 10 dollar Pennys jeans you buy for her, so she kicks in the difference of 30 dollars to get the 40 jeans she wants from Macys. The 9 year old may contribute by taking on household chores, such as help with yard work and walking the dog after school. If he wants the Volcom sweatshirt instead of the the generic sweatshirt you'd buy fro him from Wal-Mart, he can save up his allowance or do some extra chores around the house to make up the difference. Does that sound 'fair' to you? 'Fair Share' does NOT mean 'Equal Shares'. It does not mean you split the household finances into 4 parts and you each are expected to pay 25%. The 'Equality' part kicks in regarding the total amounts you have in order to contribute. Maybe you're not happy that you have to kick in the lion's share of the expenses... You would not be happy because you don't get to keep the money you earn... so, yeah... I'll concede that point. The difference is Fair Share is where everyone contributes to the operation of the household. ... I know you are a fairly smart guy, i really don't believe you cannot grasp that concept of 'Fair Share' as it applies to human conditions and are only arguing for the sake of arguement. ... Oh, yeah... and the dog contributes to the household by simply, being a dog.
OK. So someone explain to me how you determine someone's "fair share" and have everyone agree with it and be happy.
I just feel that "fair" is such a completely unachievable concept.
... I thought I did so with the whole 15% tax thing. Here... let me place in terms you might better understand. Let's say, you are married... and you have 2 kids, ages 15 and 9... and a dog. You all live in one house. You are the main bread winner and bring home an annual salary of 50K. Your wife works part time and earns 20K Your 15 year old babysits or does chores for the neighbors and makes about 500 dollars a year. The 9 year old does not work or earn any money outside the household. The dog is a dog and does what dogs do. ... Now, the operating and living expenses of the household is typical... mortgage, insurances, utilities, maintenence, food, transportation, etc... A fair share would be that you pay in a larger amount than your wife and your 15 year old, based upon your income. Your wife and kids can kick in with services. Like, your wife may handle the majority of food and enytertainment expenses with her income. You'd be a real jerk if you expected your 15 year old to use her income to pay the electric or dog food bills... but, since your 15 year old daughter makes a little money with her little side jobs, she can kick in some of her money, if she wants to... for example, she doesn't want to wear the 10 dollar Pennys jeans you buy for her, so she kicks in the difference of 30 dollars to get the 40 jeans she wants from Macys. The 9 year old may contribute by taking on household chores, such as help with yard work and walking the dog after school. If he wants the Volcom sweatshirt instead of the the generic sweatshirt you'd buy fro him from Wal-Mart, he can save up his allowance or do some extra chores around the house to make up the difference. Does that sound 'fair' to you? 'Fair Share' does NOT mean 'Equal Shares'. It does not mean you split the household finances into 4 parts and you each are expected to pay 25%. The 'Equality' part kicks in regarding the total amounts you have in order to contribute. Maybe you're not happy that you have to kick in the lion's share of the expenses... You would not be happy because you don't get to keep the money you earn... so, yeah... I'll concede that point. The difference is Fair Share is where everyone contributes to the operation of the household. ... I know you are a fairly smart guy, i really don't believe you cannot grasp that concept of 'Fair Share' as it applies to human conditions and are only arguing for the sake of arguement. ... Oh, yeah... and the dog contributes to the household by simply, being a dog.
But all of that is just one person's opinion of what a fair share is. What if I believe the 15 year old should pay the bulk of the expenses because he/she is young and more energetic?
My point is that the concept of fair is completely subjective. Fair is an unattainable concept.
I'm not talking about just taxes, either. I believe fair is an impossibility and should probably be banned from our language.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I have a feeling that this know1 guy believes nothing is fair unless he doesn't have to pay a penny in taxes.
I'm not talking about taxes and I do believe we all should pay them. I just think the government needs to be more accountable when it comes to waste and a little more hesitant to raise taxes.
BUT, with regard to this thread specifically, I do believe that the concept of "fair" is impossible to achieve.
I also believe - like I said earlier - that all of us on this board are in the top 1% when compared to the world as a whole so we have a lot of hypocrites here. This statement gets widely ignored.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
What I find interesting is that I pay more in taxes as a single person than someone who makes the same wage as me but is married with three kids. The other person gets exemptions and child tax credits. The other person sends kids to public school. Clearly more people benefiting from the government services.
Is that fair? I used less public services and I pay more in taxes.
What I find interesting is that I pay more in taxes as a single person than someone who makes the same wage as me but is married with three kids. The other person gets exemptions and child tax credits. The other person sends kids to public school. Clearly more people benefiting from the government services.
Is that fair? I used less public services and I pay more in taxes.
Probably not completely fair, but what you need to keep in mind as a single person is that some of these kids- who's education you contribute to- will be the very people you will need to rely on some point later in life (such as a doctor). If everybody left it up to someone else to make the sacrifice necessary to raise a kid... we wouldn't have any kids.
It's just like an under-populated rural school that eat up a lot of revenue to maintain. They are expensive, but we need rural people to grow food and perform various other essential tasks. It's not fair to expect them to do these types of things and bus their kids for 2 hours each direction to attend school.
I have a feeling that this know1 guy believes nothing is fair unless he doesn't have to pay a penny in taxes.
I'm not talking about taxes and I do believe we all should pay them. I just think the government needs to be more accountable when it comes to waste and a little more hesitant to raise taxes.
BUT, with regard to this thread specifically, I do believe that the concept of "fair" is impossible to achieve.
I also believe - like I said earlier - that all of us on this board are in the top 1% when compared to the world as a whole so we have a lot of hypocrites here. This statement gets widely ignored.
I'm quite comfortable. I'm not speaking to become more like the people I'm speaking towards... I'm advocating for a more equitable system so that the people born into poverty have a chance to make a life for themselves that resembles something different than that of their parents'.
In Canada, we pay a ton of taxes. Roughly speaking, I pay 40% off the top. Then I pay 15% at the point of purchase. I'm also a little worried what I might owe in a month or two. These taxes contribute to some excellent social programs and education and medical. Yes... there is abusive spending, but oh well. Scamming people suck- what can I say?
Of course I'd love to have the money that my 'gross' column displays, but at the risk of the integrity of these programs? No thanks.
But all of that is just one person's opinion of what a fair share is. What if I believe the 15 year old should pay the bulk of the expenses because he/she is young and more energetic?
My point is that the concept of fair is completely subjective. Fair is an unattainable concept.
I'm not talking about just taxes, either. I believe fair is an impossibility and should probably be banned from our language.
... I'll concede your point that says not everyone defines 'Fair' in the same terms. Again, I think you are confusing the term 'concept' with the term, 'definition'. You, for example, seem willing to accept anyone's definition of what fair should be (with your example towards your 15 year old daughter)... which is fair. But, fairness is something that Mankind can control, through a majority acceptance in a society. The rules of football, as previously explained, are a set of rules (laws) that the majority of the league has defined. The coin toss, for example.... it gives boths sides a 50/50 chance to win. It does not give the the home team... or the team that pays the highest salary... or the team that brings the most money into the league.. or the team in the larger media market an advantage. It is fair to both teams and both teams play by the same set of rules, even though one team may feel they are at a disadvantage. So, the concept of fairness is an attainable goal when people can agree on what is fair and can be (and is) implemented in the real world. Not everyone will agree on what is fair to themselves... that is true... but, the rules can be written to show no bias towards one side or the other. I am also willing to accept the fact that fairness isn't always practiced. It does not mean that fairness does not exist, it just means there are lawyers out there who can argue their point and sway others to side with them... or politicians who can be bought to write the rules to give the advantage to the highest bidder... or accountants who can work out tricks to line the pockets of the people who pay them. That (selfishness), also, is man made and Mankind can control... if he chooses to control. ... As for life not being fair... I agree... we don't get to choose our parents... like a daughter cannot choose a parent who will allow them to prostiute themselves out in order to pay the 25% of the houshold finances so the main bread winner can keep more of his earnings to himself... because, seriously, what other business, other than prostitution or porn, can an energetic 15 year old girl get into that will bring in that kind of money? Maybe making meth on her Easy Bake oven... but other than that... i can't think of anything.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
All good points..... but I'll just point out that most of us girls outgrow our Easy-Bake Ovens by the time we're 10 years old.
... Noted... so, it's either prostitution behind the Wal-Mart or home made Internet porn in the basement for the poor girl. Life is soooo not fair. But, whatcha gonna do? Daddy needs to keep 75% of his hard earned money, right?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
So again, why are we only talking about being "fair" to those people who have more than "us". Why aren't we worried about the fact that we ALL have more money than the vast majority of the world.
And if I was to give away my money and possessions to the point that what I had was "fair" in terms of the population of the earth as a whole, how much money and possessions should I retain? Ask that same question of yourselves and see what number you arrive at to put yourself in a fair position with a population that includes millions of starving people in 3rd world countries.
And before someone tries to twist what I'm saying into an anti-charity position, I'm very much in favor of charitable giving and do my best to be generous in that regard.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Well the average worldwide income is supposedly $7,000 USD..... But $7,000 goes way further in some places than it does in others. So to make it really fair, wealth would have to be divided equally among all people on earth, and then adjusted by looking at the cost of living for each individual's location ($7,000 in some third world countries would probably be the same as $70,000 in other countries if you're talking what it can buy you). If that happened, I bet there would be a LOT of money left over.
I don't think that's helpful. Just sayin'. :P
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So again, why are we only talking about being "fair" to those people who have more than "us". Why aren't we worried about the fact that we ALL have more money than the vast majority of the world.
And if I was to give away my money and possessions to the point that what I had was "fair" in terms of the population of the earth as a whole, how much money and possessions should I retain? Ask that same question of yourselves and see what number you arrive at to put yourself in a fair position with a population that includes millions of starving people in 3rd world countries.
And before someone tries to twist what I'm saying into an anti-charity position, I'm very much in favor of charitable giving and do my best to be generous in that regard.
... Okay.. i'll try to address your points. We are just saying that we believe that billionaires should not be able to skip out on paying taxes the rest of us pay with their bullshit accounting tricks and stashing their earnings in the Cayman Islands, a luxury that regular working Joes cannot afford. They make and have billions and no one expects them to give it all back, but, when they contribute less to this nation's taxes by paying less in taxes that fund programs run by this country than the guy driving a delivery truck for $30,000.00 a year, we find it a tad unfair. This nation has been good to them and their heirs... just as it has been good to us and ours. We pay, they skate. You believe that is okay, that's fine. We disagree with you. Why can't you understand that? ... And the discussion at hand has to do with the United States. From what i can gather, the people in Africa are not filing 1040s to the IRS in April. When they do, they will be included in the discussion about the American taxing system. ... Finally, I am on your side when it comes to charitable giving. It is no one else's business.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Comments
The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously?
The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group?
The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots.
...
so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
Hail, Hail!!!
The bottom line... this guy that is mentioned in the initial post claims he and his high end friends are being like the Jews in 1938 Germany. Seriously?
The thing is.. these 1% people are not just rich... they are strato-rich. And guess what, their ranks include politicians. Why would they draft any legislation that isn't in their best interests and the best intrests of thier peer group?
The best way to get things done your way is to limit the number of people who'll voice an opinion against yours. The rich keep the rich in power to decide what's best for the rich. That's not cynicism... that's just the way it is. We are under the illusion that we matter... with our votes. But, seriously, we get to vote for which of the 2 rich guys, the other rich guys print on our ballots.
...
so, seriously... to this guy... who wants us to see him in the same light as the Jews in the Berlin ghettos of 1938... Fuck You!
I agree the OP was so ridiculous, it didn't merit comment. And I never was agreeing with it. I'm just against saying that anyone asks someone to pay more taxes. And also against the concept of a "fair share", which is completely unachievable. Life isn't meant to be fair.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Well Know1...
I'm a cold hearted cynic at the best of times, but you smoke me in this department.
Life isn't meant to be fair. What a statement. I could agree with you that life isn't fair, but I'll wholeheartedly disagree with you and suggest life is meant to be fair.
Social hierarchies are man made and preserved through systems that have been entrenched and maintained by the very people that the same hierarchies serve best. Life was never intended to be like this- it's been constructed to be like this. To say this is the way life was meant to be is one of the most defeatist attitudes I could hope to come across.
And, if such attitudes are in existence and prevalent in any significant capacity... you would be correct when you say 'fair share' is unachievable: resigning ourselves to the whim of the uber rich.
The current system that placates the 'have nots' will work for some time still, but as I mentioned in an earlier post- with history to validate it- there will be some level of revolt at some period of time. It's almost assured.
You are against the concept of 'Fair Share'... really? You don't believe in 'Fairness'? I don't believe that. I believe you think fairness is a good human trait... like playing a fair game and giving everyone a fair shake. I believe you treat your children fairly, right? And your wife... her too. I believe you treat everyone you cross paths fairly... until they prove otherwise. That's what most of us probably do.
I believe... and i may be wrong... that it is the taxes part, that get your ire, right? That you do not believe any taxes should be taken... from anyone, right?
Well... that's not the real world we live in as a society of millions. If you want, go build yourself an island and live there by yourself. Then you won't have to pay taxes.. to yourself.
Here is America, many of us adhere to the concepts of fairness. We also understand that by living in a society, we contribute to a shared resource because we can't do everything ourselves. We need things like streets and sewer lines and water supply systems and cops and firemen and soldiers... which.. well, at least me... I can't build and maintain a fresh water supply or fight a 3 alarm structure fire by myself. Those things cost money and we all need to share the expense. We can't all do this equally... as in, we all kick in the same amount of dollars to cover everything... so, we contribute relatively. As in, relative to our income. That is what we call, 'fair'.
And a fair plan would be if we all kicked in the same percentage of what we make. You make $70K so you kick in 15% or $10,500.. someone making $32K kicks in $4800 and the guy who makes $2Million kicks in $300,000. Now, I understand that $300,000.00 is a hell of a lot more than $4800.00... but, if you are making 2 million a year... America has been really great to you. The amount is relative to what you make... that, to me, sounds fair.
...
What isn't fair to most of us is the guy making 2 million, sheltering his income with fancy accounting tricks and pays less than the guy making $32,000. If you believed in fairness... i think you would agree.
...
Also.. I believe you meant to say, 'Life is not fair'... it is not fair that someone, by the lottery of birth, is given life in a penthouse or life in the projects. Fairness is a Human Characteristic that is created or denied by us... Mankind.
Hail, Hail!!!
I can barely take listening to people go on about this who it happened to, this guy is from another fucking planet.
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
If it were possible, we'd look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age.
We will never, ever, ever make life truly fair and I think that tricking yourself that you can just adds to stress and frustration. Also, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring.
As for "fair share" that is a very nebulous concept that's almost impossible to define and would vary greatly from person to person if we really contemplated it.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
When you say, I don't think people really would really want life to be fair. It would be too boring... tell that to the kid in Africa or the women in Saudi Arabia or the minimum wage working mother of two renting a shit apartment in your country.
And, I believe it was Cosmo that pointed out the absurdity of allowing rich people to hoard their money by affording them tax breaks to circumvent paying their proportion of taxes like the guy who makes $20,000 a year does. Nobody wants more- they just want the same.
Yes... it could be stressful thinking about how the uber rich shit all over the planet and its inhabitants, but hey... I'd rather be stressed and aware of the inequities that exist instead of shoving my head up my ass and blissfully content with whatever enters my field of vision and spectrum of awareness.
I think we all understand and agree that life is not fair. Those things are out of our control. We are NOT debating that.
We are arguing that the rules set by humans CAN be fair... but, we CHOOSE to make the rules to favor ourselves, rather than making it fair for everyone.
A very simple example is this...the rules in football are the same for both teams. The rules are not slanted for one team or the other. A touchdown is worth 6 points for all teams. It would not be fair if Denver got 20 points for a touchdown and Seattle got 4 points. Those rules are manmade and we can make things fair for both Denver and Seattle.
The same would apply to the tax structure to make everyone pay the same percentage and eliminate the loopholes that allow the billionaires to pay almost nothing while the rest of us pay our shares.
...
That's it. it is that simple. We are not getting into philisophical debates about concepts of life, the universe or anything. We are simply talking about rules/laws that man makes and man has complete control over.
...
Also... I think you are confusing fairness with equality. If we all look identical, have the same money, get the same illnesses (or not) not have anything bad happen to friends and family and die at the exact same age... we would all be equal. We could be all of those things you stated... and STILL be unfair or unjust to each other, right?
Hail, Hail!!!
I just feel that "fair" is such a completely unachievable concept.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Not everyone has to be 'happy' about it and not everybody has to agree to it- that's not what we are discussing. We are talking about equity. Just as the rich dude can say, "Well I pay more then!"... the poor guy can say, "I don't have enough afterwards then".
I thought I did so with the whole 15% tax thing.
Here... let me place in terms you might better understand.
Let's say, you are married... and you have 2 kids, ages 15 and 9... and a dog. You all live in one house.
You are the main bread winner and bring home an annual salary of 50K.
Your wife works part time and earns 20K
Your 15 year old babysits or does chores for the neighbors and makes about 500 dollars a year.
The 9 year old does not work or earn any money outside the household.
The dog is a dog and does what dogs do.
...
Now, the operating and living expenses of the household is typical... mortgage, insurances, utilities, maintenence, food, transportation, etc...
A fair share would be that you pay in a larger amount than your wife and your 15 year old, based upon your income.
Your wife and kids can kick in with services. Like, your wife may handle the majority of food and enytertainment expenses with her income.
You'd be a real jerk if you expected your 15 year old to use her income to pay the electric or dog food bills... but, since your 15 year old daughter makes a little money with her little side jobs, she can kick in some of her money, if she wants to... for example, she doesn't want to wear the 10 dollar Pennys jeans you buy for her, so she kicks in the difference of 30 dollars to get the 40 jeans she wants from Macys.
The 9 year old may contribute by taking on household chores, such as help with yard work and walking the dog after school. If he wants the Volcom sweatshirt instead of the the generic sweatshirt you'd buy fro him from Wal-Mart, he can save up his allowance or do some extra chores around the house to make up the difference.
Does that sound 'fair' to you?
'Fair Share' does NOT mean 'Equal Shares'. It does not mean you split the household finances into 4 parts and you each are expected to pay 25%. The 'Equality' part kicks in regarding the total amounts you have in order to contribute.
Maybe you're not happy that you have to kick in the lion's share of the expenses... You would not be happy because you don't get to keep the money you earn... so, yeah... I'll concede that point.
The difference is Fair Share is where everyone contributes to the operation of the household.
...
I know you are a fairly smart guy, i really don't believe you cannot grasp that concept of 'Fair Share' as it applies to human conditions and are only arguing for the sake of arguement.
...
Oh, yeah... and the dog contributes to the household by simply, being a dog.
Hail, Hail!!!
nice post, btw
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
My point is that the concept of fair is completely subjective. Fair is an unattainable concept.
I'm not talking about just taxes, either. I believe fair is an impossibility and should probably be banned from our language.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/20/oxfam-85-richest-people-half-of-the-world
...the richest 85 people on the globe – who between them control as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population put together-...
BUT, with regard to this thread specifically, I do believe that the concept of "fair" is impossible to achieve.
I also believe - like I said earlier - that all of us on this board are in the top 1% when compared to the world as a whole so we have a lot of hypocrites here. This statement gets widely ignored.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Is that fair? I used less public services and I pay more in taxes.
It's just like an under-populated rural school that eat up a lot of revenue to maintain. They are expensive, but we need rural people to grow food and perform various other essential tasks. It's not fair to expect them to do these types of things and bus their kids for 2 hours each direction to attend school.
In Canada, we pay a ton of taxes. Roughly speaking, I pay 40% off the top. Then I pay 15% at the point of purchase. I'm also a little worried what I might owe in a month or two. These taxes contribute to some excellent social programs and education and medical. Yes... there is abusive spending, but oh well. Scamming people suck- what can I say?
Of course I'd love to have the money that my 'gross' column displays, but at the risk of the integrity of these programs? No thanks.
I'll concede your point that says not everyone defines 'Fair' in the same terms. Again, I think you are confusing the term 'concept' with the term, 'definition'.
You, for example, seem willing to accept anyone's definition of what fair should be (with your example towards your 15 year old daughter)... which is fair. But, fairness is something that Mankind can control, through a majority acceptance in a society. The rules of football, as previously explained, are a set of rules (laws) that the majority of the league has defined. The coin toss, for example.... it gives boths sides a 50/50 chance to win. It does not give the the home team... or the team that pays the highest salary... or the team that brings the most money into the league.. or the team in the larger media market an advantage. It is fair to both teams and both teams play by the same set of rules, even though one team may feel they are at a disadvantage.
So, the concept of fairness is an attainable goal when people can agree on what is fair and can be (and is) implemented in the real world. Not everyone will agree on what is fair to themselves... that is true... but, the rules can be written to show no bias towards one side or the other. I am also willing to accept the fact that fairness isn't always practiced. It does not mean that fairness does not exist, it just means there are lawyers out there who can argue their point and sway others to side with them... or politicians who can be bought to write the rules to give the advantage to the highest bidder... or accountants who can work out tricks to line the pockets of the people who pay them. That (selfishness), also, is man made and Mankind can control... if he chooses to control.
...
As for life not being fair... I agree... we don't get to choose our parents... like a daughter cannot choose a parent who will allow them to prostiute themselves out in order to pay the 25% of the houshold finances so the main bread winner can keep more of his earnings to himself... because, seriously, what other business, other than prostitution or porn, can an energetic 15 year old girl get into that will bring in that kind of money? Maybe making meth on her Easy Bake oven... but other than that... i can't think of anything.
Hail, Hail!!!
Noted... so, it's either prostitution behind the Wal-Mart or home made Internet porn in the basement for the poor girl.
Life is soooo not fair. But, whatcha gonna do? Daddy needs to keep 75% of his hard earned money, right?
Hail, Hail!!!
And if I was to give away my money and possessions to the point that what I had was "fair" in terms of the population of the earth as a whole, how much money and possessions should I retain? Ask that same question of yourselves and see what number you arrive at to put yourself in a fair position with a population that includes millions of starving people in 3rd world countries.
And before someone tries to twist what I'm saying into an anti-charity position, I'm very much in favor of charitable giving and do my best to be generous in that regard.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I don't think that's helpful. Just sayin'. :P
Okay.. i'll try to address your points.
We are just saying that we believe that billionaires should not be able to skip out on paying taxes the rest of us pay with their bullshit accounting tricks and stashing their earnings in the Cayman Islands, a luxury that regular working Joes cannot afford. They make and have billions and no one expects them to give it all back, but, when they contribute less to this nation's taxes by paying less in taxes that fund programs run by this country than the guy driving a delivery truck for $30,000.00 a year, we find it a tad unfair. This nation has been good to them and their heirs... just as it has been good to us and ours. We pay, they skate. You believe that is okay, that's fine. We disagree with you. Why can't you understand that?
...
And the discussion at hand has to do with the United States. From what i can gather, the people in Africa are not filing 1040s to the IRS in April. When they do, they will be included in the discussion about the American taxing system.
...
Finally, I am on your side when it comes to charitable giving. It is no one else's business.
Hail, Hail!!!