07 May 2010, 6:10 pm
07 May 2010, 6:58 pm
07 May 2010, 11:44 pm
08 May 2010, 3:32 am
08 May 2010, 8:57 am
08 May 2010, 9:46 am
He should have simply implemented a form of progressive taxation instead. 
08 May 2010, 1:22 pm
09 May 2010, 4:20 am
11 May 2010, 9:42 am
11 May 2010, 9:49 am
15 May 2010, 4:46 pm
Asp-Z wrote:
HermanTheTosser wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
On the subject of redistributing wealth, I disagree with it. This isn't communism, it's a capitilist society.
You can have a moderate and fair redistribution of wealth without communism or even socialism. Any increase in wealth for the most wealthy is unjust without a proportionate improvement of the situation for the worst off.
Not that Obama, Brown has the balls to see this through.
Generally speaking, wealthy people are wealthy because they chose to do something that could make them wealthy, e.g. start a business, then worked to build that business up and make it profitable. Maybe some of their ventures failed and they found motivation to keep trying again. The bottom line is that most rich people earned their money through hard work, and people who aren't rich could easily quit their job and start their own business if they were motivated enough to earn that much money for themselves - even poor people living in council flats in bad areas can do it, if anything they have more of a chance because they have less to lose when they take the risk of starting a business.
Therefore, I think those people are entitled to their money - they worked for it, and the poor people had just as much opportunity to get rich themselves - it's not like you need private education to be entrepreneurial. And if a system was put in place to take rich peoples' money and "redistribute" it, they'd all move to tax havens anyway, which would just damage our economy and GDP.
Did you watch Junior Apprentice?
17 May 2010, 4:33 am
17 May 2010, 4:46 am
17 May 2010, 10:55 am
rmgh wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
HermanTheTosser wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
On the subject of redistributing wealth, I disagree with it. This isn't communism, it's a capitilist society.
You can have a moderate and fair redistribution of wealth without communism or even socialism. Any increase in wealth for the most wealthy is unjust without a proportionate improvement of the situation for the worst off.
Not that Obama, Brown has the balls to see this through.
Generally speaking, wealthy people are wealthy because they chose to do something that could make them wealthy, e.g. start a business, then worked to build that business up and make it profitable. Maybe some of their ventures failed and they found motivation to keep trying again. The bottom line is that most rich people earned their money through hard work, and people who aren't rich could easily quit their job and start their own business if they were motivated enough to earn that much money for themselves - even poor people living in council flats in bad areas can do it, if anything they have more of a chance because they have less to lose when they take the risk of starting a business.
Therefore, I think those people are entitled to their money - they worked for it, and the poor people had just as much opportunity to get rich themselves - it's not like you need private education to be entrepreneurial. And if a system was put in place to take rich peoples' money and "redistribute" it, they'd all move to tax havens anyway, which would just damage our economy and GDP.
Did you watch Junior Apprentice?
Yup, I did! Was very good! My friend tells me I'm like Jordan because I'm "good with business but not with people"
17 May 2010, 12:02 pm
Asp-Z wrote:
rmgh wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
HermanTheTosser wrote:
Asp-Z wrote:
On the subject of redistributing wealth, I disagree with it. This isn't communism, it's a capitilist society.
You can have a moderate and fair redistribution of wealth without communism or even socialism. Any increase in wealth for the most wealthy is unjust without a proportionate improvement of the situation for the worst off.
Not that Obama, Brown has the balls to see this through.
Generally speaking, wealthy people are wealthy because they chose to do something that could make them wealthy, e.g. start a business, then worked to build that business up and make it profitable. Maybe some of their ventures failed and they found motivation to keep trying again. The bottom line is that most rich people earned their money through hard work, and people who aren't rich could easily quit their job and start their own business if they were motivated enough to earn that much money for themselves - even poor people living in council flats in bad areas can do it, if anything they have more of a chance because they have less to lose when they take the risk of starting a business.
Therefore, I think those people are entitled to their money - they worked for it, and the poor people had just as much opportunity to get rich themselves - it's not like you need private education to be entrepreneurial. And if a system was put in place to take rich peoples' money and "redistribute" it, they'd all move to tax havens anyway, which would just damage our economy and GDP.
Did you watch Junior Apprentice?
Yup, I did! Was very good! My friend tells me I'm like Jordan because I'm "good with business but not with people"
It was good. Haha! I thought he was really good. That's probably why they picked on him because they knew he would be tough competition.
01 Sep 2010, 5:13 pm
