Page #: 2/15 |
@cerberus611 | 2 November 19 | |
@ newt182 - 2.11.19 - 05:57pm If so, why? It seems this is a hot topic in the news today/recently Trickle down economics isn't working well. Billionaires are h0arding money, while poverty is increasing. The argument is that amount of money could never be spent by just one individual, so why have it? fu*king commie |
||
@newt182 | 2 November 19 | |
@ phallica - 2.11.19 - 06:52pm So billionaires, just because they've made a lot of money, should have their profits expropriated to better the have-nots? Sounds like the kind of communist bullshit that ends up in disaster. They only have that wealth because everyone else participates in the current system. That wealth has been created for them by everyone else, it's the people who have made it. Why shouldn't people who have that much wealth be made to pay more. We already live in a world where the law says they should pay more. |
||
@cerberus611 | 2 November 19 | |
@ newt182 - 2.11.19 - 07:21pm Why do they need it? It's nearly impossible for them to spend it. People like Bill Gates are helping millions while still holding onto their wealth, making sure it's actually going to the real needy and not corrupt individuals which IMF seems to be funding. |
||
@newt182 | 2 November 19 | |
@ cerberus611 - 2.11.19 - 07:29pm People like Bill Gates are helping millions while still holding onto their wealth, making sure it's actually going to the real needy and not corrupt individuals which IMF seems to be funding. Why does he need it? |
||
@phallica | 2 November 19 | |
@ newt182 - 2.11.19 - 07:29pm They only have that wealth because everyone else participates in the current system. That wealth has been created for them by everyone else, it's the people who have made it. Why shouldn't people who have that much wealth be made to pay more. We already live in a world where the law says they should pay more. Or they've utilised the system to accrue vast wealth. The people didn't give them their money, it was most likely in exchange for a good or service, so they should be punished for their success? What's the alternative system by the way, the one responsible for a hundred million deaths? lol |
||
@phallica | 2 November 19 | |
@lugus | 2 November 19 | |
Yes and the simple reason is without them, we would all be paying a hell of a lot more tax
|
||
@ogdenz | 2 November 19 | |
@ phallica - 2.11.19 - 07:45pm Or they've utilised the system to accrue vast wealth. The people didn't give them their money, it was most likely in exchange for a good or service, so they should be punished for their success? What's the alternative system by the way, the one responsible for a hundred million deaths? lol Capitalism has killed more people than the one I think you are alluding to. Approx 9.1 million people starve to death a year,many more die due to lack of affordable medicines..diseases that could be immunized against. So your figure if 100 million is equalled after only 11 years of starvation under capitalism. |
||
@dan27notts | 2 November 19 | |
@ ogdenz - 2.11.19 - 08:04pm Capitalism has killed more people than the one I think you are alluding to. Approx 9.1 million people starve to death a year,many more die due to lack of affordable medicines..diseases that could be immunized against. So your figure if 100 million is equalled after only 11 years of starvation under capitalism. This is correct and its still the best system, communism and solicism kill far more. Lesser of the 2 evils |
||
@dan27notts | 2 November 19 | |
@ newt182 - 2.11.19 - 07:20pm You could argue the exact same thing with h0arding that wealth. The money stays in a bank account and doesn't help anyone, even the person who has it. It is just a figure on a computer, nothing more. Also, if it was redistributed it would create growth, investment and innovation as it would actually be being used. What evidence do have that they just sit on their wealth? Most of billions wealth isn't even cash, its in the value of the company that they own and they invest or give away a hell of a lot of it |
||