Those against redistribution of wealth

[AFMatt]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, at least know they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Now a CEO getting a huge golden parachute package when his company has fallen to crap, that's a whole different story.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Yes, they do. If you are offered X amount of money to perform Y task, and you sufficiently complete that task, then you have earned it. Work ethic, or your life situation have nothing to do with it. That is how capitalism works.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: manlymatt83
I'm curious to know how those against redistribution of wealth don't feel some sort of moral obligation to help.

Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach the man how to fish, feed them for a lifetime. People need to have goals - to work up to being good fishermen.

There have been true socialist societies attempted, and they failed horribly. Most people stop bettering themselves if there is no direct compensation for being becoming better.

If everyone "bettered themselves" who would do the low wage jobs? Someone has to take $9.50 an hour or whatever minimum wage is.

Perhaps the unemployed who are collecting food stamps? There are zillions of examples of able-bodied Americans suckling from the system when they could go out and work.

Do you not understand what I'm saying? Someone has to do the minimum wage jobs, and we should do our best to allow them to live decently. You can't just say "they should better themselves" when you know damn well someone has to fill that rung of society.

 

[Stuxnet]

Oh, for the record... my wife and I give hundreds of dollars a year to charities of our choosing. If our taxes were lower, we could afford to give even more.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: QuantumPion

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
They should eliminate all income tax and just do a straight sales tax of 20% or whatever it would need to be to break even.

That way if the rich person doesn't want to pay tax, he can just amass money, but if he wants nice things (like a $10M yacht), he will pay a hell of a lot more in tax than anyone in a low income bracket.

A true progressive tax. :thumbsup:

Bullshit. That's only progressive if you are already rich.

Throw in a few capped exemptions, like homestead exemptions on property taxes, and you have a 20 page tax law that seems fairly progressive to me.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Oh, for the record... my wife and I give hundreds of dollars a year to charities of our choosing. If our taxes were lower, we could afford to give even more.

That's fine and dandy as long as the tax cuts lead to lower funding of social programs and not something essential. I'm assuming this is the road that you're going down.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: manlymatt83
I'm curious to know how those against redistribution of wealth don't feel some sort of moral obligation to help.

Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach the man how to fish, feed them for a lifetime. People need to have goals - to work up to being good fishermen.

There have been true socialist societies attempted, and they failed horribly. Most people stop bettering themselves if there is no direct compensation for being becoming better.

If everyone "bettered themselves" who would do the low wage jobs? Someone has to take $9.50 an hour or whatever minimum wage is.

Perhaps the unemployed who are collecting food stamps? There are zillions of examples of able-bodied Americans suckling from the system when they could go out and work.

Do you not understand what I'm saying? Someone has to do the minimum wage jobs, and we should do our best to allow them to live decently. You can't just say "they should better themselves" when you know damn well someone has to fill that rung of society.

It's called entry level position. Makes you appreciate what you have when you work your way up. Has worked for litterally 100's of millions of americans. It is the fabric that our society is built on. It's called work for a reason. If you can't lift yourself out of this position, you are either lazy, playing the system, or do need help. If you do need help, I want to help you. No one else.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

Pass some of that shit over here man.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Yes, they do. If you are offered X amount of money to perform Y task, and you sufficiently complete that task, then you have earned it.

And in comparison to someone who worked just as hard (actually went to school, graduated, worked their way their graduate school, etc.), all so they could perform their $80K job adequately, and they succeed at that, then they are no different than the athlete that earns his money (and there are few of them, but they certainly exist).

Work ethic, or your life situation have nothing to do with it. That is how capitalism works.

Unbridled, unregulated, asinine and long-abandoned capitalism from the 19th and early 20th century? Sure, that's how capitalism worked then. Not today, nor should it. Everyone here was born under a progressive tax system, in all likelihood.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

Pass some of that shit over here man.

Good call reject.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

Pass some of that shit over here man.

Good call reject.

When can I stop by? I deserve some of what you got, just because I was born in the same country as you.

You better have some good beer.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Yes, they do. If you are offered X amount of money to perform Y task, and you sufficiently complete that task, then you have earned it.

And in comparison to someone who worked just as hard (actually went to school, graduated, worked their way their graduate school, etc.), all so they could perform their $80K job adequately, and they succeed at that, then they are no different than the athlete that earns his money (and there are few of them, but they certainly exist).

Work ethic, or your life situation have nothing to do with it. That is how capitalism works.

Unbridled, unregulated, asinine and long-abandoned capitalism from the 19th and early 20th century? Sure, that's how capitalism worked then. Not today, nor should it. Everyone here was born under a progressive tax system, in all likelihood.

Yes, well the athlete making $1,000,000 is giving more to the government then you, me, and the next guy combined.

So you don't think that people should be offered a job and then paid when they do it? What other magical system have you created? You get offered a job, paid to do it, minus a cut if your job isn't a real one according to Evan.

Whether or not an employee of any company should retain his job is up to the employer, not random internet posters.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

When can I stop by? I deserve some of what you got, just because I was born in the same country as you.

You better have some good beer.

Nah, I don't swing that way kiddo.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

When can I stop by? I deserve some of what you got, just because I was born in the same country as you.

You better have some good beer.

Nah, I don't swing that way kiddo.

Thats not what I heard :lips:

 

[AFMatt]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Evan

About the level of intelligence I expected in your retort.

You don't know much about professional sports then.

I can't help that you're so poorly informed that you can't understand that most professional athletes don't "earn" millions any more than a working mother earns 80K.

Well, if you want to ignore the fact that professional athletes, gifted or not, had to work nearly all their lives just to get to a professional level, they earn their money the same way movie stars earn theirs: People pay to watch them play.
Most of them worked their trade hard, for many years, WITHOUT PAY, to get where they are today. They definitely earned it, and the fans throwing their money at them proves it.

Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

Excuse me? Professional athletes often start working as young kids. They continue working, without pay, through junior high and high school. When they get to college, yes some may have scholorships (either athletic or other) which can be construde as pay, but thats not the case for all of them, and they are still working that job. Then, when they finally get drafted, they get to do that job for pay.
Show me a single person in your $80K example that worked in that job for the first 8 or more years with no pay at all. I'm not talking about taking school (the athletes went to school too). I'm not talking about getting their degree (many athletes did their 4 years and got a degree). I am talking about going to their place of employment and doing a job for years before they actually earned a dime.

As far as taking more taxes from them? The bottom line is, it is absolutely unreasonable to penalize people who are able to make more money than others; No matter what their job is or how hard they had to work to get there.

BTW, I know plenty of people making very good pay who didn't work half as hard to get there as most athletes have to work.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: AFMatt

Excuse me? Professional athletes often start working as young kids. They continue working, without pay, through junior high and high school. When they get to college, yes some may have scholorships (either athletic or other) which can be construde as pay, but thats not the case for all of them, and they are still working that job. Then, when they finally get drafted, they get to do that job for pay.

I don't know who you're referring to, triple A baseball players or something? I'm talking professional athletes; NBA, NFL, MLS, NHL, etc. These athletes do not "work" any more than anyone else "works" during their primary and secondary education. Most prospects that can make it professionally hardly pay a damn thing as an undergraduate; they get a practically free education and often benefits normal people simply cannot get no matter how hard they work.

Show me a single person in your $80K example that worked in that job for the first 8 or more years with no pay at all. I'm not talking about taking school (the athletes went to school too). I'm not talking about getting their degree (many athletes did their 4 years and got a degree). I am talking about going to their place of employment and doing a job for years before they actually earned a dime.

What specifically are you referring to? Just so we're clear, are you referring to athletes who have to "work" on varsity teams in high school or something? Because like I said, the guy who eventually makes 80K does not make a dime when he's in high school either (obviously some exceptions to this).

As far as taking more taxes from them? The bottom line is, it is absolutely unreasonable to penalize people who are able to make more money than others; No matter what their job is or how hard they had to work to get there.

And in this scenario, you would have no problem with a CEO that was appointed to a position he didn't earn purely out of family connections? And then took down the company while getting compensated hundreds of millions? Your statement here would support such travesties.

BTW, I know plenty of people making very good pay who didn't work half as hard to get there as most athletes have to work.

I'm sure you do, but let's be real here, there's no comparison between professional athletes and average middle class Americans when it comes to working hard. Athletes tend to be notoriously, well, daft.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Yes, well the athlete making $1,000,000 is giving more to the government then you, me, and the next guy combined.

As they should.

So you don't think that people should be offered a job and then paid when they do it? What other magical system have you created? You get offered a job, paid to do it, minus a cut if your job isn't a real one according to Evan.

Has nothing to do with being a "real job".

Whether or not an employee of any company should retain his job is up to the employer, not random internet posters.

I'm merely repeating well known, long implemented progression taxation realities that have been in place for decades. When you want to respond with actual, relevant substance, let me know.

 

[AFMatt]

Well, according to you I guess athletes don't actually have to take part in the sport all those years, practice for the sport all those years, and work out for the sport all those years. They just walk out of college with a degree in Sport and get a multi-million $ job.

As far as the CEO comment, nothing in my statement said anything about how wrong it is for a CEO to get a huge payout even when the company fails. That is a problem with corporations and their lame ass practices, and has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. Maybe if we were talking about penalty taxes for that specific situation, it would be related, but we aren't. We are talking about raising taxes on people who make more money, simply because they have the ability to make more money than others.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Oh, for the record... my wife and I give hundreds of dollars a year to charities of our choosing. If our taxes were lower, we could afford to give even more.

That's fine and dandy as long as the tax cuts lead to lower funding of social programs and not something essential. I'm assuming this is the road that you're going down.

:thumbsup:

 

[AFMatt]

Originally posted by: Evan

What specifically are you referring to? Just so we're clear, are you referring to athletes who have to "work" on varsity teams in high school or something? Because like I said, the guy who eventually makes 80K does not make a dime when he's in high school either (obviously some exceptions to this).

That person who eventually makes that $80K.. Lets say he goes to work in IT. He isnt doing an IT job in high school. Of course he doesn't make a dime, he isnt doing the job! He doesnt have to. He is simply going to school learning the same thing as everyone else. He then goes to college and learns more about IT, and probably gets a part time job as a pizza delivery guy while he is there.

The athlete, on the other hand, has to go to school and do his job, for no pay, if he expects to ever make money in the future. His job is the sport he chose to play. He has to do it and excel in it through those years. He then goes to college and learns about whatever degree he elected to pursue, meanwhile still taking part in that job, for no pay, so he can get a paid job in that field in the future.

Summary:
$80k/year IT guy = doesn't have to do IT for free during high school and college if he expects to get paid for it.
Athlete = has to do it for free, and work hard at it, through high school and college if he expects to ever get paid for it.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

When can I stop by? I deserve some of what you got, just because I was born in the same country as you.

You better have some good beer.

Nah, I don't swing that way kiddo.

Thats not what I heard :lips:

LMFAO

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Originally posted by: Evan
Uh, professional athletes, on average, don't have to work without pay any longer than anyone else. In the NBA, you can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, guaranteed, as early as 19. You get to go to college for free in the vast majority of cases, and in a lot of cases you actually get cash and incentives (illegally) on the side if you're a top prospect in the NCAA.

Now, I have zero problem with the money athletes get in absolute terms (with rare exceptions), but it's simply unreasonable to suggest they should get to keep just as much as someone earning $80K who worked just as hard (and there is no arguing this point) by simply having them pay a slightly higher effective tax rate. Say 4% higher. It helps the less fortunate, but also helps those in the middle class who did indeed work just as hard and do indeed deserve to share in the opportunity these athletes can only achieve in America. That's the bottomline.

So just because you worked your ass off to making those 5 Big Mac's you should get some of the money I made doing my EQUAL amount of work in giving that patient a check-up?

Do you want the fish or the fishing rod? :roll:

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: manlymatt83
I'm curious to know how those against redistribution of wealth don't feel some sort of moral obligation to help.

Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach the man how to fish, feed them for a lifetime. People need to have goals - to work up to being good fishermen.

There have been true socialist societies attempted, and they failed horribly. Most people stop bettering themselves if there is no direct compensation for being becoming better.

AW, the fallacy of proverbs. Give a man a fish, he gets to eat one meal. Teach him to fish, even provide him a boat, gear and tackle. Then watch him starve ito death in the middle of the desert.

me spel gud?? thn me edit.

 

[manlymatt83]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
It's not that we don't feel a moral obligation to help, it's that many of those redistributions go to black holes. Like SagaLore said in the second post, I have no problem helping someone get up on their feet, but I do have a problem feeding someone who won't get off their ass..

I agree with you. But how does one defend against the type of person that responds ALWAYS to this argument with "It isn't like that."

I know tons of very left wing people who would say "It isn't like that" or "They don't have the opportunities you did" or "there's no way to get them off the street and get them jobs." How does one defend that? if I say I don't want to give my money directly to the poor (IE: redistribution of wealth), how can I justify the fact that I was fortunate to be educated and get a good job, while others are on the streets and not having the same opportunities?