Redistribution of Wealth - What does it actually mean? - Page 6 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #51 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 01:57 AM
~BANNED~
 
Jakarta Expat's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2006
Vehicle: PM me to Join the Expat Muslims for Obama Club........
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 17,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsden View Post
It's a vicious bit of government enslavement. And we were supposed to be a red state Directly aimed at lovers of nice cars.

Well.........

Jakarta Expat is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #52 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 02:10 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by benz rider View Post
Re-distribution of wealth = Socialism
This is the response that confuses me most. it is a 100%=100% answer. No gray, no consideration that "redistribution" has a million different possible meanings.

As an example. In a SOCIALIST model, you would take ALL the earning of EVERY PERSON, no matter if they made $1,000 a year or $100,000,000 a year, put all the money in a single account and REDISTRIBUTE it EQUALLY among all people either through cash payroll or through services. It is a Redistribution of Wealth.

As a second example. If the tax code today took 24% from folks making under $100,000 and 27% from folks making over $100,000, if you changed the tax code to take 20% from folks who make under $125,000 and 30% for those who make over $125,000 it is also a Redistribution of Wealth.

Yet the two examples could not be further apart both philosophically, economically or punitively.

Now, extrapolate the possible variations that could exist and see the reason the phrase, by itself, without codified budgets is meaningless.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #53 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 02:20 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
One might argue that redistribution of assets ≠ redistribution of wealth.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #54 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 02:35 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
One might argue that redistribution of assets ≠ redistribution of wealth.
But in all the TAX models we have discussed, we are talking about cash assets, payroll, etc.

No one has talked about eminent domain clauses to confiscate property or move large masses of wealth from private land owners to the public.





There is, however that HUGE swath of land on the Palisades of the Hudson River that has to be worth Billions that is owned by the Catholic Church. But I digress.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #55 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 02:37 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
'Assests' takes from everyone, 'wealth' takes from the wealthy. 'Wealth' was your word.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #56 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 02:50 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
daisound's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2008
Vehicle: W210.265/2001, W220/S500/2000, Porsche 997 C2S/2006, GMC K1500/1992
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear
As an example. In a SOCIALIST model, you would take ALL the earning of EVERY PERSON, no matter if they made $1,000 a year or $100,000,000 a year, put all the money in a single account and REDISTRIBUTE it EQUALLY among all people either through cash payroll or through services. It is a Redistribution of Wealth.

As a second example. If the tax code today took 24% from folks making under $100,000 and 27% from folks making over $100,000, if you changed the tax code to take 20% from folks who make under $125,000 and 30% for those who make over $125,000 it is also a Redistribution of Wealth.
The 1st paragraph is a communist plan which has been used in last 50 yrs by communist China and Russia and proof to be stupid and does not work. That is fact and No IF.

2nd paragraph is a plan proposed by Obama, it is a change of rules in the middle of the game. This kind of suddenly change of game rule is most fearful of Wall street capitalist. If you were saving all your saving to be a wealth middle class person by standard. Now the game is different, will it be a fair game for you ? For the one who is on the benefit side of the new tax code definitely to vote for it. It is like a win in lottery. But for the unfortunate donor is not fair. Since the previous code has been there for a while, any significant change of tax code has to be done in a period of 10 years, it will be alright to change the tax rate by 0.25% every year.

500SEC 1984 retired at 192K
Porsche 928S GT 1984 (euro) retired at 243K
daisound is offline  
post #57 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 03:15 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by daisound View Post
The 1st paragraph is a communist plan which has been used in last 50 yrs by communist China and Russia and proof to be stupid and does not work. That is fact and No IF.

2nd paragraph is a plan proposed by Obama, it is a change of rules in the middle of the game. This kind of suddenly change of game rule is most fearful of Wall street capitalist. If you were saving all your saving to be a wealth middle class person by standard. Now the game is different, will it be a fair game for you ? For the one who is on the benefit side of the new tax code definitely to vote for it. It is like a win in lottery. But for the unfortunate donor is not fair. Since the previous code has been there for a while, any significant change of tax code has to be done in a period of 10 years, it will be alright to change the tax rate by 0.25% every year.
Changing rules in mid game? Tell me differently, but all I've heard is Obama is returning to the tax rates of the 90's. Not quite a game change, just a refutation of Bushism.

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #58 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 03:18 PM
Surely A Large Human
 
Qubes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Posts: 34,253
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Unlike George W. McCain, at least he's man enough to know you can't spend at Democrat levels when you're only bringing in Republican tax revenues.
Qubes is offline  
post #59 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 05:36 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
'Assests' takes from everyone, 'wealth' takes from the wealthy. 'Wealth' was your word.
A person with "only" $30K in their savings and a $50K job would consider their money their wealth. It is not usually ONLY associated with the wealthy.

The "wealthy" tend go have good wealth much like the "healthy" tend to have good health. But everyone has health. [no need to smack me for that one, I did it myself]

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #60 of 68 (permalink) Old 10-28-2008, 05:41 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
wealth
–noun
1. a great quantity or store of money, valuable possessions, property, or other riches: the wealth of a city.
2. an abundance or profusion of anything; plentiful amount: a wealth of imagery.
3. Economics.
a. all things that have a monetary or exchange value.
b. anything that has utility and is capable of being appropriated or exchanged.
4. rich or valuable contents or produce: the wealth of the soil.
5. the state of being rich; prosperity; affluence: persons of wealth and standing.


And there's the rub. Coming from an economics background, you gravitate toward definition 3. The rest of us paupers tend to gravitate toward definition 5. The word has power and a connotation that "assets" lacks.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    OBAMA: TRAGEDY THAT 'REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH' NOT PURSUED BY SUPREME COURT Jayhawk Off-Topic 18 10-28-2008 02:04 AM
    Bush May Have Lost Wealth During Presidency.......... Jakarta Expat Off-Topic 8 05-16-2008 08:10 AM
    Wealth and Religiosity Jayhawk Off-Topic 28 02-21-2008 05:31 PM
    This forum is a wealth of information rudedude W163 M-Class 4 04-30-2007 11:55 AM
    Wealth of Nations Botnst Off-Topic 6 07-30-2006 05:14 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome