-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Wealth
- Thread starter dukeos
- Start date
Play Centre said:
Thats your CHOICE....like Pratt CHOSE to donate money.
What part of this don't you get.....I AM ADVOCATING PEOPLE TO HAVE A CHOICE WITH WHAT THEY DO WITH THEIR MONEY!!!! :
I am AGAINST having rules in place where if you have so much in your bank account then you have to donate or give away a percentage of it and that the Government determines how much you are allowed to have and how much 'is enough'.
I hope I have made myself clear this time.
If any of you multi-billionaires wish to choose to donate some money, just send a pm and I'll send you my postal address. Thanks. 8)
The way I see it, Livers, you would be one of those kids who play footy and count their stats, and it wouldn't matter if the team won or lost!
Liverpool said:
This is where you go wrong every single time Livers. You fail to realise that there are millions of people out there that are in horrible situations that no amount of responsibility on their behalf can help. There is nothing pathetic about these people's lives at all.
Disco08 said:
Really?
So someone who has been on the dole for 10 years (and I know one such person!) can't help themselves?
Come off it!
I don't know what is more pathetic...the people who CHOOSE to live off welfare and hassle people in the street for change...or the people making excuses for them.
In fact...instead of having thresholds demanding people with money donate it to the loafers....what next, a "tall tax" and give it to short-arses out there to "make it fair"? :
:cutelaughTall men earn more than shorter workers, study finds
AUSTRALIAN researchers have found that tall workers earn more than their shorter colleagues, especially among men.
A man who is six foot can expect to take home a "wage premium" of almost $1000 a year.
The boffins paint a bleak picture for the vertically-challenged, but there's good news for chubby workers.
Overweight people actually earn more than their skinny workmates.
Researcher Andrew Leigh, an economist at the Australian National University, said a factor in the tall men's pay perk was that they were more capable at some physical tasks, such as reaching the top shelf.
"Beyond that is basically discrimination," Prof Leigh said.
"We tend to think that tall people are more powerful and smarter, even when they're not necessarily."
Prof Leigh, who stands at 180.34 centimetres, said it was unfortunate that society was biased towards taller people. There was not much short people could do about it.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25495970-661,00.html
Disco08 said:
Thats why we have tax thresholds, charities that people can CHOOSE to donate to, etc.
Making rich people subsidise the unfortunate and giving them no choice, is wrong in my opinion.
Its not their responsibility or fault that these people are "disadvantaged", is it?
Liverpool, I have been reading some of your stuff and it seems that you like to trot out your usual villians no matter what the debate.
The point that I was trying to make was that in all sorts of ways, most of us try and help out in our communities and in wider society. i would suggest that most people are genrous and symapthetic to all sorts of causes.
The recent bushfires are a great example of the generosity and humanity of many Australians, not just the wealthy.
Why do you persist in trying to disrupt the debate with your own personal bugbears?
The point that I was trying to make was that in all sorts of ways, most of us try and help out in our communities and in wider society. i would suggest that most people are genrous and symapthetic to all sorts of causes.
The recent bushfires are a great example of the generosity and humanity of many Australians, not just the wealthy.
Why do you persist in trying to disrupt the debate with your own personal bugbears?
Play Centre said:
Yes, people who CHOOSE to donate money to causes such as the bushfire victims (I was one of them also) are generous....and yes, these generous people come from all walks of life, some poor themselves, some very wealthy.
And the debate is about re-distributing rich people's money and giving it to the poor, as you can see from the initial post on this thread:
dukeos said:
So how am I "disrupting the debate" by saying I am against this idea and that people out there need to take responsibility for their own actions, for a start?
That rich people do NOT have a responsibility to others just because they are rich....which is what I have said to Disco in my previous 2 posts.
Hmmm....
The other point to make is that this is net wealth - that is all the wealth the individuals have tied up in assets and companies. So it's not personal wealth in most cases. The money is tied up in corporations that are working, doing business, employing thousands of people.
If we were to take this money away, what happens to those corporations? What happens to all the people employed by those corporations? What happens to the economies that depend on those corporations?
Now I think obscene personal wealth is not too flash either but this is too simplistic a way to look at the problem IMO.
The other point to make is that this is net wealth - that is all the wealth the individuals have tied up in assets and companies. So it's not personal wealth in most cases. The money is tied up in corporations that are working, doing business, employing thousands of people.
If we were to take this money away, what happens to those corporations? What happens to all the people employed by those corporations? What happens to the economies that depend on those corporations?
Now I think obscene personal wealth is not too flash either but this is too simplistic a way to look at the problem IMO.
