Wealth equality is a terribly bad thing. We agree on this. But nobody - not even those awful libs - is arguing for wealth equality. It's a long leap to go from pointing out that a CEO makes 300:1 compared to his line workers than it is to advocate a 1:1 equality ratio.USN_Hokie wrote:I would go so far as to say that wealth equality is a bad thing.Hokie5150 wrote:Provided that wealth is created/obtained legally, where is the harm if one is super wealthy and another is not?
So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
ALL Americans have these things? Have you ever walked the streets of an American urban city? Or volunteered at a soup kitchen?Hokie CPA wrote:When you consider that even the poorest of the poor in the USA would be considered among the wealthiest people in the land if the visited a third world nation, I would argue that the rising tide DOES raise all boats. Everyone in this country does, indeed, have their needs met and they still manage to get trivial wants, like that new X-Box One and cable television. Most Americans have a microwave oven. They have hot water, indoor plumbing, a FLOOR. These things are all considered the luxuries of wealth in many (most?) countries.VoiceOfReason wrote:Wealth inequality in and of itself is not a bad thing. If everyone had enough wealth to live on... who cares? The issue comes when you have millions of people living below the poverty line. If trickle down economics really worked... and a rising tide raised all boats... you would never hear of income inequality.Hokie5150 wrote:Provided that wealth is created/obtained legally, where is the harm if one is super wealthy and another is not?
I get the point that the homeless in America may not look like the slums of Mumbai... however, neither you or me would wish either life on anyone we know.
- Hokie CPA
- Posts: 2634
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 am
- Alma Mater: Norfolk Academy to Virginia Tech
- Party: I reject your party
- Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Ignorance is no excuse. Anyone can go to the public library, if they do not have Internet available closer to home, and find out about available assistance if they are truly interested in learning about it. As for those who can't do for themselves, surely they have someone available to do it for them. I just don't accept excuses as legitimate cause to dismiss the claim that everyone in this country has access to everything they need.VisorBoy wrote:How can you possibly make such a conclusion?
Many would love to receive assistance but can't either because they don't know how to or can't do it themselves.
The numbers are telling...
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
If one person gets more wealthy, that does not necessarily mean that another person becomes less wealthy. The alternative to the first person becoming wealthy isn't necessarily that other people will be more wealthy, it can be that the wealth won't exist.
Also, who says the poverty line is the line between having enough wealth to live on or not?
Also, who says the poverty line is the line between having enough wealth to live on or not?
VoiceOfReason wrote:Wealth inequality in and of itself is not a bad thing. If everyone had enough wealth to live on... who cares? The issue comes when you have millions of people living below the poverty line. If trickle down economics really worked... and a rising tide raised all boats... you would never hear of income inequality.Hokie5150 wrote:Provided that wealth is created/obtained legally, where is the harm if one is super wealthy and another is not?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
The fact that only a % of the eligible actually sign up for the benefits should tell us that something is amiss. Either they're legally barred from benefits (immigrants) or they are unable to get the benefits themselves (children) or they don't know how to or are incapacitated and unable to get the benefits (elderly) or other reasons.Hokie CPA wrote:Ignorance is no excuse. Anyone can go to the public library, if they do not have Internet available closer to home, and find out about available assistance if they are truly interested in learning about it. As for those who can't do for themselves, surely they have someone available to do it for them. I just don't accept excuses as legitimate cause to dismiss the claim that everyone in this country has access to everything they need.VisorBoy wrote:How can you possibly make such a conclusion?
Many would love to receive assistance but can't either because they don't know how to or can't do it themselves.
The numbers are telling...
It's easy to consider something easy when you already have it/know it.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
-
- Posts: 770
- Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 2:33 am
Someone asked: Why is wealth inequality a bad thing? IF.
..the poster is compelled to ask such a question, he/she could neither comprehend nor accept the truthful answer. Any attempt to convey a rational reply would hit deaf ears and blind eyes.
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
1) Who says that's the mark of success?
2) Confiscating wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
3) Directing what a person can do with their wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
2) Confiscating wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
3) Directing what a person can do with their wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
VisorBoy wrote:You're missing my point. If we were to build a society from scratch, the mark of success would be that all people have their basic provisions provided without trampling on others' rights. That says nothing about HOW the provisions are provided.awesome guy wrote:VisorBoy wrote:And where did I indicate how those are provided?Society doesn't provide for the individual.how one would structure a society from scratch?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
1) I did, didn't I?Marine Hokie wrote:1) Who says that's the mark of success?
2) Confiscating wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
3) Directing what a person can do with their wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
VisorBoy wrote:You're missing my point. If we were to build a society from scratch, the mark of success would be that all people have their basic provisions provided without trampling on others' rights. That says nothing about HOW the provisions are provided.awesome guy wrote:VisorBoy wrote:And where did I indicate how those are provided?Society doesn't provide for the individual.how one would structure a society from scratch?
2) We disagree, but not applicable to the conversation anyway.
3) Not applicable to the conversation.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
I have no problem with people becoming more and more wealthy. Never said I did. What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?Marine Hokie wrote:If one person gets more wealthy, that does not necessarily mean that another person becomes less wealthy. The alternative to the first person becoming wealthy isn't necessarily that other people will be more wealthy, it can be that the wealth won't exist.
Also, who says the poverty line is the line between having enough wealth to live on or not?
VoiceOfReason wrote:Wealth inequality in and of itself is not a bad thing. If everyone had enough wealth to live on... who cares? The issue comes when you have millions of people living below the poverty line. If trickle down economics really worked... and a rising tide raised all boats... you would never hear of income inequality.Hokie5150 wrote:Provided that wealth is created/obtained legally, where is the harm if one is super wealthy and another is not?
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Think about how you believe wealth equality should be achieved, then you'll see how #2 and #3 apply.
VisorBoy wrote:1) I did, didn't I?Marine Hokie wrote:1) Who says that's the mark of success?
2) Confiscating wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
3) Directing what a person can do with their wealth is "trampling on others' rights".
VisorBoy wrote:You're missing my point. If we were to build a society from scratch, the mark of success would be that all people have their basic provisions provided without trampling on others' rights. That says nothing about HOW the provisions are provided.awesome guy wrote:VisorBoy wrote:And where did I indicate how those are provided?Society doesn't provide for the individual.how one would structure a society from scratch?
2) We disagree, but not applicable to the conversation anyway.
3) Not applicable to the conversation.
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
I'm sure somebody somewhere does, depending on what you subjectively consider "basic needs". Surely you don't believe that of the 50 million or so people on welfare or food stamps, if not for the generosity of the state with our money, they would be without their "basic needs being met"?
VoiceOfReason wrote: I have no problem with people becoming more and more wealthy. Never said I did. What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
You're trying to deduce HOW basic provisions would be met. I have not made any mention of that, and refuse to because my point is broader than what a single societal construct (e.g. ours) may or may not require.Marine Hokie wrote:Think about how you believe wealth equality should be achieved, then you'll see how #2 and #3 apply.
The point is to gauge what makes a society the most successful. Basic provisions at a minimum plus no restriction on inalienable rights is a good start IMHO.
Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
I believe a significant percentage of those people would have extreme difficulty meeting their basic needs using legal methods. If not for those programs what do you think would happen to those people?Marine Hokie wrote:I'm sure somebody somewhere does, depending on what you subjectively consider "basic needs". Surely you don't believe that of the 50 million or so people on welfare or food stamps, if not for the generosity of the state with our money, they would be without their "basic needs being met"?
VoiceOfReason wrote: I have no problem with people becoming more and more wealthy. Never said I did. What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
If every human had "enough wealth to live on," we'd still probably be living not too differently than we did about 2000+ years ago. "Excess resources" frees people up to do other things...like invent things...or invest in others. This can't happen if there's no transfer of wealth from one person to another.VoiceOfReason wrote: If everyone had enough wealth to live on... who cares?
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
VoiceOfReason wrote:I believe a significant percentage of those people would have extreme difficulty meeting their basic needs using legal methods. If not for those programs what do you think would happen to those people?Marine Hokie wrote:I'm sure somebody somewhere does, depending on what you subjectively consider "basic needs". Surely you don't believe that of the 50 million or so people on welfare or food stamps, if not for the generosity of the state with our money, they would be without their "basic needs being met"?
VoiceOfReason wrote: I have no problem with people becoming more and more wealthy. Never said I did. What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
- Hokie CPA
- Posts: 2634
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 am
- Alma Mater: Norfolk Academy to Virginia Tech
- Party: I reject your party
- Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
People who live in the street are either working like Hell to get off the streets and into a home, or they live there by choice. I submit that every single one of those people who does make the effort DO get off the streets and a relatively short period of time. If you work hard and make the right choices in this country, you will not stay homeless. The fact is a great many people living on the streets choose to live that way and I feel absolutely no personal obligation to subsidize the life they have chosen for themselves.VoiceOfReason wrote:What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
There are no mentally ill in this country? We must be especially blessed...Hokie CPA wrote:People who live in the street are either working like Hell to get off the streets and into a home, or they live there by choice. I submit that every single one of those people who does make the effort DO get off the streets and a relatively short period of time. If you work hard and make the right choices in this country, you will not stay homeless. The fact is a great many people living on the streets choose to live that way and I feel absolutely no personal obligation to subsidize the life they have chosen for themselves.VoiceOfReason wrote:What I do have a problem with is people living without basic needs being met. Do you deny these people exist in America?
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Which?
VoiceOfReason wrote:LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
The items in bold that you claim... if you please...Marine Hokie wrote:Which?
VoiceOfReason wrote:LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
- Hokie CPA
- Posts: 2634
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 am
- Alma Mater: Norfolk Academy to Virginia Tech
- Party: I reject your party
- Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
VoiceOfReason wrote:The items in bold that you claim... if you please...Marine Hokie wrote:Which?
VoiceOfReason wrote:LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
How about I've seen it? I lived in one of the poorest "hoods" of this city for nearly a decade. Half the people on my block were on food stamps and WIC. The apartment complex at the end of the street provided about 60 units of Section 8 housing, IIRC. The complex around the corner was also Section 8 housing and must have had close to 100 units. Every single one of my neighbors had at least 3 to 4 of the 6 items he mentioned.
Last edited by Hokie CPA on Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.
- Marine Hokie
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
http://www.census.gov/hhes/well-being/
VoiceOfReason wrote:The items in bold that you claim... if you please...Marine Hokie wrote:Which?
VoiceOfReason wrote:LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
-
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
- Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
- Party: Every chance I get
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
I see nothing of xboxes and other bling in this report. If you are going to make such a claim, you might want to be better prepared to support it. Especially since you are one of the posters who is most diligent about challenging the information of those with whom you disagree.Marine Hokie wrote:http://www.census.gov/hhes/well-being/
VoiceOfReason wrote:The items in bold that you claim... if you please...Marine Hokie wrote:Which?
VoiceOfReason wrote:LOL... please support your previous statement with some evidence before we move on...Marine Hokie wrote:Considering that most of them have xbox, high speed internet, computers, cell phones, HDTVs, and cars, I'd say it would be hard to agree with you.
So prior to welfare programs, there were millions more criminals?
What do YOU think would happen to them?
- Hokie CPA
- Posts: 2634
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 am
- Alma Mater: Norfolk Academy to Virginia Tech
- Party: I reject your party
- Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
No answer for the guy who has actually seen it, huh?VoiceOfReason wrote:I see nothing of xboxes and other bling in this report. If you are going to make such a claim, you might want to be better prepared to support it. Especially since you are one of the posters who is most diligent about challenging the information of those with whom you disagree.Marine Hokie wrote:http://www.census.gov/hhes/well-being/
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.
Re: So, tell me. Why is wealth inequality a bad thing?
Plenty of people argue this (even posters on UWS). They even have their own political parties.VoiceOfReason wrote:Wealth equality is a terribly bad thing. We agree on this. But nobody - not even those awful libs - is arguing for wealth equality. It's a long leap to go from pointing out that a CEO makes 300:1 compared to his line workers than it is to advocate a 1:1 equality ratio.USN_Hokie wrote:I would go so far as to say that wealth equality is a bad thing.Hokie5150 wrote:Provided that wealth is created/obtained legally, where is the harm if one is super wealthy and another is not?