Topic: Rich have too much (Read 3371 times)
Do not blame rich people on having much in life. They are very resourceful and have so much ambition in life that is why they are getting richer and richer. Poor people should learn from the skills of rich people on becoming rich so they won’t stay poor. Let’s just encourage ourselves to be the best version of ourselves.
Well there's a saying the rich gets richer and poor gets poorer. This is a fact and there are so many articles pointing out what rich people does to the system.
It might be good if you somehow get to the point where you can have your own business but aside from that you can't get your leverage from getting yourself rich from your poor state.
It might be good if you somehow get to the point where you can have your own business but aside from that you can't get your leverage from getting yourself rich from your poor state.
The influence of rich people on the system is quite logical. These are people who, as a rule, run a large business, where significant amounts of consumption, taxes and other things are generated. Plus, they interact with both private clients and the state, and as a result, they will look for more convenient conditions for themselves. Although I agree, this often leads to improper lobbying or even corruption. But the question arises - how can a poor person, on whom nothing depends, who does not affect anything, influence the system? The answer is extremely simple and logical - NO. And this is a normal situation.
Well there's a saying the rich gets richer and poor gets poorer. This is a fact and there are so many articles pointing out what rich people does to the system.
It might be good if you somehow get to the point where you can have your own business but aside from that you can't get your leverage from getting yourself rich from your poor state.
It might be good if you somehow get to the point where you can have your own business but aside from that you can't get your leverage from getting yourself rich from your poor state.
Richness comes from sacrifices, sweat, blood and cannot be easily attained by doing nothing. Poorness are the result of making poor and wrong decisions in life + little opportunities and even if opportunities were there, doubts are present.
Not really, you can be rich if you are a son of a wealthy man. In other words, you have a lucky start. People can have unlucky start when they were born in a poor family. But they can create their own future when they work hard, etc.I see a lot of poor people blaming the rich and want to tax them, it's like blaming "the force" for giving them good luck plus punish them for being rich. Don't treat them like an enemy, but an extremely lucky friend who can help you. Why? Because if you treat them wrong, they will run away. #capitalflight
If government allows this kind of thinking, more and more people will rely to those who work harder than them. Richness comes from sacrifices, sweat, blood and cannot be easily attained by doing nothing. Poorness are the result of making poor and wrong decisions in life + little opportunities and even if opportunities were there, doubts are present. I believe what we need is to have more opportunities/jobs to have a more good possibilities of success.
I don't think you have to collect from the rich and give the poor the rich always take the risk to make more money why the poor are always scared to invest the little they are having so that they won't lose there money and definitely life itself is all about risk if you can take the risk you will definitely make it. The rich are definitely working for there there money so I see no reason why you have to collect from them and give the people that are scared to take the risk. Lots of rich people always invest in Cryptocurrency and they always make huge money and poor are are scared to invest in Cryptocurrency because so even say cryptocurrency is a scam and they are not ready to waste there time and money there so why will you collect from the person that can risk his/her life and give the person that is scared to take risk.
The idea of "taking from the rich and giving to the poor" strongly resembles the approaches of the lumpenized, degraded "rulers" who started the revolution of 1917, and then moved on to mass repression, persecution and murder of their citizens. At the heart of the ideology there was just the idea "there should be no rich, and everything that the rich have accumulated should be taken from them and given to the poor." As a result, we got a criminal country, with a degraded population, and 0 cost of human life. Kstaiti - just giving money to the poor will only make them worse. They must earn money and strive for change. If they are to be financed, then through development, training. BUT, as practice shows, they don't need it, they need a bundle of money to "walk it nicely", buy an iPhone and an expensive watch ... Before you feel sorry for them - look at what values they have and what they have a real craving for ...
I'll agree with the idea that the rich currently have too much money and it would be much more useful circulating within society, however capitalism has proven to be the most effective economic system in history. That being said it is perfectly possible to tax the rich much higher than they are currently being taxed and without it effecting them much at all. When you hear Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world, talking about how his effective tax rate is lower than his secretary you know that politicians have implemented a broken system. The major trouble is that money effectively buys power via laws, you really need to prevent lobbying in government in order to create the right laws and it seems so heavily ingrained now that it would take a monumental effort to change it.
I think this is great but it is better if everyone is given more knowledge about the business
because if everyone is given money, many of them will not think of using that money as capital but will be spent immediately and will forever continue to depend on other people who are richer.
if they are given knowledge about how to manage finances, how to do business well etc. I think they will be able to make better use of it for their life. all they need is not compassion but opportunity.
because if everyone is given money, many of them will not think of using that money as capital but will be spent immediately and will forever continue to depend on other people who are richer.
if they are given knowledge about how to manage finances, how to do business well etc. I think they will be able to make better use of it for their life. all they need is not compassion but opportunity.
The rich will never tell you they have too much or are satisfied at the level they are, if you are to interview the richest man in the world I know the person still wants more money. And for this law, I don't think it can work in all Countries with Corruption and red-tapism all over. The world will be a better place if we learn to share from our excesses.
What kind of excess are you talking about. Cause if we call excess, isn't excess "a going beyond what is regarded as customary or proper, then what is proper?
If we would take your view as the standard, then what is the custom or the limit before we call something to be an excess? Cause in actual world of innovation and non-stop progress, custom in things like this can't be defined.
The rich will never tell you they have too much or are satisfied at the level they are, if you are to interview the richest man in the world I know the person still wants more money. And for this law, I don't think it can work in all Countries with Corruption and red-tapism all over. The world will be a better place if we learn to share from our excesses.
They don't need to leave the country, they will just leave their state in order to avoid paying high taxes on the state level. See California residents leaving to states with lower taxes because democrat leadership has made the tax rate completely insane to pay for their woke green policies.
How many people can afford to do that? For those who are employed in California or having business in that state, moving to another state is not a viable option. Only a few, such as stock traders and those who inherited their wealth can do that (and most of these people are migrating to low-tax states). For the same job, salaries can be 2x or 3x higher in California when compared to states such as Montana or Utah. So even after the taxes, the in hand salary is higher for those who work in California.
If rich don't have too much, how can be they called rich? People in this world has a different walks of life and we can't force the rich to just give to the poor. Poor should strive for their livings. Nor can the government force the rich to pay more taxes, so there are laws we have to follow, the rich and the poor have to follow.
just giving away, I don't think it's a good way to lift the economy, indeed everyone must struggle to get their welfare. the richer people of course their needs will be more and more, like what if he hires someone, I think that is a great way to help 
I don't think you have to collect from the rich and give the poor the rich always take the risk to make more money why the poor are always scared to invest the little they are having so that they won't lose there money and definitely life itself is all about risk if you can take the risk you will definitely make it. The rich are definitely working for there there money so I see no reason why you have to collect from them and give the people that are scared to take the risk. Lots of rich people always invest in Cryptocurrency and they always make huge money and poor are are scared to invest in Cryptocurrency because so even say cryptocurrency is a scam and they are not ready to waste there time and money there so why will you collect from the person that can risk his/her life and give the person that is scared to take risk.
Hmm, unfortunately, redistribution of wealth has some dire economic consequences.
First of all, the rich are very good at hiding their assets, so good luck trying to steal their money when it's on offshore bank accounts or tied up into physical assets (or perhaps some even tied to bitcoin). Second of all, the best way to make a rich person flee a country (therefore no contribution to the tax pool) is to massively raise their taxes. You see this on an individual level in the United States because each state has discretion on their local tax rates. In fact, the way the US works, even municipalities can create their own tax rate. But what you end up with is the rich leaving highly taxed states for states with lower tax rates. In Europe where the entire country has the same effective tax rate, as I mentioned before, the rich will just shove their assets offshore.
First of all, the rich are very good at hiding their assets, so good luck trying to steal their money when it's on offshore bank accounts or tied up into physical assets (or perhaps some even tied to bitcoin). Second of all, the best way to make a rich person flee a country (therefore no contribution to the tax pool) is to massively raise their taxes. You see this on an individual level in the United States because each state has discretion on their local tax rates. In fact, the way the US works, even municipalities can create their own tax rate. But what you end up with is the rich leaving highly taxed states for states with lower tax rates. In Europe where the entire country has the same effective tax rate, as I mentioned before, the rich will just shove their assets offshore.
For a country such as the United States, the risk of rich people renouncing their citizenship in order to avoid paying higher taxes is very low. Even rich people have their businesses and most of the immovable assets within the US. Renouncing the US citizenship would mean that now these businesses and assets would no longer be taxed under a favorable regime. Same can be said about the European Union, where the taxes are much higher than what they have in the United States.
They don't need to leave the country, they will just leave their state in order to avoid paying high taxes on the state level. See California residents leaving to states with lower taxes because democrat leadership has made the tax rate completely insane to pay for their woke green policies.
About taxes, I know people here often don't like them, it's always painful to pay of course. Plenty of politicians and normal people think rich people should be taxed more. In fact many rich people agree !
A wealth tax is being proposed in the US, in my country we've had one on and off for decades. It doesn't really work. The US one is bigger.
An argument against such a tax is that when you own lots of stocks, like rich people often do and that's how they're getting richer, you don't have "realized" your gain until you sell the stocks, just like with crypto. So you might be down after having been up. First of all most of these people clearly are always up. And since the tax is flat, if their wealth is down, they will pay less, it seems fair to me.
A wealth tax is being proposed in the US, in my country we've had one on and off for decades. It doesn't really work. The US one is bigger.
An argument against such a tax is that when you own lots of stocks, like rich people often do and that's how they're getting richer, you don't have "realized" your gain until you sell the stocks, just like with crypto. So you might be down after having been up. First of all most of these people clearly are always up. And since the tax is flat, if their wealth is down, they will pay less, it seems fair to me.
Rich have too much !!'
Nedd laws the money u dont use long time will be taken and goved to poor
Lets take and share to poor more taxes and taxes % to me im poor
Time for revolution !!!
Nedd laws the money u dont use long time will be taken and goved to poor
Lets take and share to poor more taxes and taxes % to me im poor
Time for revolution !!!
As one of my favorite book authors Robert Kiyosaki says, "It is better to teach how to fish and not give away a single fish to satisfy a day's hunger."
You cannot give gifts because you teach to be dependent, and currently if you do that, people are based on habits and just as there are good habits, people learn faster and get used to bad habits.
For this they can help with loans and financing obtaining profit percentages, but always working. Being rich is not bad, nor are the rich bad either, of course there are exceptions, but for those reasons it is that there must be effort for work.
If rich don't have too much, how can be they called rich? People in this world has a different walks of life and we can't force the rich to just give to the poor. Poor should strive for their livings. Nor can the government force the rich to pay more taxes, so there are laws we have to follow, the rich and the poor have to follow.
If the rich cannot have too much money, then how can they be called rich?
If such a law existed then I am sure there would be many rich people who would be crazier to spend their money quickly, if that was the case then it would certainly be a very useless waste. So, let them or rich people be free to save their money because after all, of course there will be moments where rich people will make large donations when needed and that will certainly be better and more useful.
If such a law existed then I am sure there would be many rich people who would be crazier to spend their money quickly, if that was the case then it would certainly be a very useless waste. So, let them or rich people be free to save their money because after all, of course there will be moments where rich people will make large donations when needed and that will certainly be better and more useful.
Precisely. I don't think rich people are the only one who is the problem here because not all rich people doesn't get all their money from corruption or any illegal activities because there are rich people who work really hard just to have that lifestyle. While poor people, on the other hand, there are few people who only rely on the support of the government or donation and they don't even do anything but sit there waiting for relief, to put it simply some of them are just lazy, so wouldn't be unfair for wealthy people if such law exist? However, there are poor people who really strive in order to have a good life but lack of money stopping them to do so. And that kind of poor people is the ones who should get the benefits.
Rich have too much !!'
Nedd laws the money u dont use long time will be taken and goved to poor
Lets take and share to poor more taxes and taxes % to me im poor
Time for revolution !!!
Satoshi has already invented bitcoin for this. You just have to wait until the FRS machine diesNedd laws the money u dont use long time will be taken and goved to poor
Lets take and share to poor more taxes and taxes % to me im poor
Time for revolution !!!
Patience my young padawan
Modern society makes people more greedy and has more material needs. They will want other things bigger than they are now. If one day the rich accept only one house and a car and simply eat and drink, then only that will have the opportunity for the poor.
The message in this one is twisted, especially to the last phrase you stated. There are other different opportunities for poor in different scenarios, some are given scholarships, some are given grants, some are being adopted, etc. You can't dismiss this opportunity no matter how low the probability of getting one.
Every class of society has its own opportunity and I believe that the poor also have a chance to rise, but why are the poor still so numerous? All matter is finite on our earth and time does not favor the poor because they have a very low starting point. They cannot afford housing opportunities if the rich are constantly amassing finite assets such as real estate. Many people work their lives just enough to buy them a home.
The whole modern market social model is built on banal human greed and is quite competitive and viable. Personally, I am not happy with some of the costs of such a model of modern capitalism, such as the excessive wealth of individual members of society, but all sorts of social experiments, such as socialist regimes and all sorts of restrictions on wealth, led to even worse results. Therefore, I am against such proposals as one house and one car, and I am in favor of creating conditions for the state to improve the well-being of the rest of the population. That is, not a restriction, but rather a stimulation of the other layers.
The purely socialist regime annihilated the other roles of the private economy and was led only by the state economy. That holds back economic growth. Currently, socialist countries such as Vietnam, China, and LAOS are constantly expanding their development scale and receiving investment from abroad. They are already rich and have fewer poor people. Countries like Korea and Cuba are embargoed by the US and they have not developed to their full potential.I don't blame each regime because the way they run is not the same. Just after the pandemic, see how Americans went out on the streets of Europe faced starvation and unemployment.
Proof that the capitalist economy is bad is that the Texas electric utility has raised the price of electricity hundreds of times to make a profit.
Jump to: