Usually people with higher incomes pay more for living expenses than people with less. While they might pay the same for food and stuff, the mortgage costs more, and then there's insurance and taxes and stuff that ways the richer person down more... Unless they live in the same conditions. But you usually don't see that a lot. We have a spendy society. They have the same percentage of payments due. They earn the same percentage. However, the guy who gets $1000 p/month should not get the same money as the guy who gets $100 p/month. The rich guy gets the correct amount of money that he should get. No more, no less. He still pays more for taxes and stuff.
If you can live comfortably with $200, the why does the person who only pays $50 in taxes, get to keep $950? The person who keeps $95 has a hard time trying to LIVE, while the person who has $750 more than what he needs, doesn't need give a single cent to the poor man.
Why does this society praise the rich and not help the poor?
Yes it is. He spent a few trillion on the war, and that ruined the economy completely.
You know a Democratic Congress declared war on Afghanistan but a Republican Congress declared war on Iraq? How many people are in Congress? 535. Is Bush 535 people? No. Learn how the government works before you post stupid things.
Kevin - our arguments clearly show that it is BETTER than socialism for paying for things, so you have to refute our arguments before you can make claims like that.
[quoteI just explained why Libertarianism is better than socialism for EVERYBODY - not "just the rich." [/quote]
So how does someone who only makes $30 000 a year pay for his two children and wife? Their education for one year alone costs $20 000 and $10 000 cannot sustain a human life, let alone four.
Either way you ARE paying for it, but it still matters, because business just does a better job of "aying for it" than government.
You ELECT the people who WORK in the GOVERNMENT and so that they can handle YOUR money the way YOU want.
In a business, you don't get to choose how a business runs. You can only choose which business you want to pay. What if you don't like any of the businesses in the market?
Kevin - our arguments clearly show that it is BETTER than socialism for paying for things, so you have to refute our arguments before you can make claims like that.
I cannot believe you are being so blunt and say your argument is better than mine when you didn't even bother did read mine, or comment on it. It just shows you are arrogant, pretentious, and selfish. You are giving all Libertarians a bad name.
Why can't we all realize what is really happening right now?
You ELECT the people who WORK in the GOVERNMENT and so that they can handle YOUR money the way YOU want.
What is happening is that if there is a democratic candate as pres, the republicans will blame him for EVERY thing that is going on, and gain the majority and make it so that NO laws will come through, so you realize who ever the president is nobody will win in American canidates.
Why does this society praise the rich and not help the poor?
Because the Republicans make sure that they please the people with the REAL power in our nation, the rich, so that they can give monry to thier campaign to sway the mind of the helpless poor people.
Rich people pay a portion of their money to fund the education of the money.
lolwut?
People who are rich, put the money in. The government doesn't have money, but the rich people do. Besides, if you make a million dollar salary, you get to keep $600 000. That's more than enough to live off of.
Of coarse the goverment has money, but the rich people aren't always giving there fair share with the republicans. They are hiding their money in swiss bank accounts, asking for tax breaks and recieving them because they are powerful.
I HAVE NEVER SAID THE GOVERNMENT WAS NONPROFIT.
Well, what is a nonprofit organization? It is a company that does not work towards getting money, but just giving it away. A lot of nonprofit organizationes are charities, which ask for money and then give it away for the "Greater Good". Isn't that kind of our goverment? We take taxes and use them to help our people. The only different is is that we have to enforce taxes because generally, people are greedy, especially the rich. The republins are usually rich, and they are no different.
What is happening is that if there is a democratic candate as pres, the republicans will blame him for EVERY thing that is going on, and gain the majority and make it so that NO laws will come through, so you realize who ever the president is nobody will win in American canidates.
i dun liek it wen people intrarupt my conversashons wid other people and aply stuff dat has nothng to do with wut i was talking abt.
Because the Republicans make sure that they please the people with the REAL power in our nation, the rich, so that they can give monry to thier campaign to sway the mind of the helpless poor people.
Just stop.
Rich people pay a portion of their money to fund the education of the money.
[quote]lolwut?
[/quote]
I meant to put poor instead of money.
Of coarse the goverment has money, but the rich people aren't always giving there fair share with the republicans. They are hiding their money in swiss bank accounts, asking for tax breaks and recieving them because they are powerful.
Government is funded by taxes. We give our money to the government. Actually, the US is asking the Swiss Banks to stop being so secret.
Well, what is a nonprofit organization? It is a company that does not work towards getting money, but just giving it away. A lot of nonprofit organizationes are charities, which ask for money and then give it away for the "Greater Good". Isn't that kind of our goverment? We take taxes and use them to help our people. The only different is is that we have to enforce taxes because generally, people are greedy, especially the rich. The republins are usually rich, and they are no different.
STOP TALKING ABOUT THE REPUBLICANS. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM. Republicans are idiots with a purpose. Libertarians are intellectuals with a purpose, and that's why it is harder to argue against them.
These numbers are based on an annual rate. These exceed 50 000. Do you think someone would be able to pay for it? What about someone who makes only 30 000?
So you believe we should make the rich pay? What's the point in being rich if you're going to lose all your money anyway?
Anyway, you're still assuming it's more expensive to live under a free market system. You don't take into account the fact that these services would very likely be cheaper in a free market.
Somalia is Libertarianism in action
I don't know too much about Samalia, how is it compared to the rest of Africa?
So you believe we should make the rich pay? What's the point in being rich if you're going to lose all your money anyway?
If someone makes one million dollars annually, does being able to keep $600 000 seem like very little? You can live more than comfortably with that. Any six figure salary provides a comfortable living.
Anyway, you're still assuming it's more expensive to live under a free market system.
SOCIALISM IS NOT AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE FREE MARKET. Socialism can occur with a free market. The free market means that the economy is driven by private companies. Socialism just dictates that the money should be balanced out more.
You don't take into account the fact that these services would very likely be cheaper in a free market.
The free market still exists, but the government just provides services that every human should be entitled to.
Let's take lighting for example. Let's say a company named Velcro Inc. is a lighting company. It provides lighting for $120 a month. It takes $90 to power your home's lights, and the thirty extra dollars is for a profit. The lighting company only has 5 people to charge, so they make a profit of $150.
If the government provided lighting, it would be cheaper. The amount to pay for lighting also costs $90. The government charges ten people $1 000 for the lighting of twenty people. Now, each person puts in their money to cover the $2 000 for lighting, and the government makes a profit on $200.
Velcro Inc. makes more money, but those who cannot afford the $120 for lighting, don't pay and that's why there are less people. The government makes a larger profit, and can use that surplus for bureaucrats, parks, roads, and other things. Velcro Inc. uses the surplus to pay its executives more, and gives nothing back to those who pay.
Do you understand? The government makes a smaller profit off of each person, but since there are more persons, they make more money. I would rather have a million one-dollar bills than a thousand hundred-dollar bills.
If someone makes one million dollars annually, does being able to keep $600 000 seem like very little? You can live more than comfortably with that. Any six figure salary provides a comfortable living.
Wow, isn't the a bit greedy?
Why do we have to rob people of their money to help others?
It's impossible to argue against your logic. If you make one million dollars, you don't need all of it. But it's wrong to steal from someone just because they have extra or more than what they need.
Sell your xbox or Playstation and give that money to the poor. You only need one TV in your house. Why do you have multiple phones? You only need one house phone. There's an extra car you aren't using, you need to give that car to someone who doesn't own one.
The argument that the rich don't need all of their money is not a valid argument.
The free market means that the economy is driven by private companies. Socialism just dictates that the money should be balanced out more.
Wealth distribution so everyone is more "equal" is unfair. If you earn more money than someone else, it's taken from you. That's unfair. You can't help it that they can't manage their money or that they are stupid peons. You can't help it that they took a risk and failed. Why do you have to pay for their mistakes?
We humans have to work together, but not through coercion of a master hand. We must work together through our own observations and through our own dilemmas.
Noname, well, the goverement has zero involvment with country, so it is chaotic, in fact, piracy is quite common.
I don't know much about Somalia. I'm just curious as to how the rest of Africa is doing compared to Somalia.
About Somalia: The nation is highly prone to dust storms and droughts in summer and floods during the rainy season. As a result the Somalian economy, which is largely agrarian, is extremely vulnerable. Besides, Somalia has a lack of natural resources, and most of its mineral reservoir is unexploited. Consequently, Somalia's economy is one of the poorest and least developed in the world. Somalia's economic development has been mixed. Somalia continues to be in a delicate state due to several civil war outbreaks and floods, which have left thousands of people homeless. As a result of inadequate government support and administration, Somalia's private sector has grown considerably, particularly in the spheres of trade, commerce and infrastructure. Private participants have also extended their contribution to the primary sectors, particularly in livestock and fisheries. The United Nations, in a 2007 report, stated that Somaliaâs service industry is thriving. Despite these favorable changes, Somalia has a meager GDP per capita of $600. The absence of a central government authority has been detrimental to Somaliaâs economy, particularly to its currency, which has been debased considerably. [...] Despite facing extreme poverty, Somalia fares better than several African nations in terms of economic potential and infrastructure, according to the World Bank. What the nation needs is a stable and able government that is able to capitalize on its economic potential. Source: Economy Watch
You consider taking some of the money from the rich to give to the poor, greedy? Greedy to who? The people who benefit because they cannot afford to pay for their children's healthcare or education?
[quote]Why do we have to rob people of their money to help others?
I assume you're no a fan of Robin Hood, are you?
It's impossible to argue against your logic.
Yay.
If you make one million dollars, you don't need all of it.
Exactly. Give it to people who need it more than you do.
But it's wrong to steal from someone just because they have extra or more than what they need.
It is also wrong to deny people healthcare because they are ill or cannot afford it. It is wrong to deny children education because their parent's cannot afford it.
Sell your xbox or Playstation and give that money to the poor.
The rich would never give to the poor without any reason to. Many of rich actually evade taxes.
You only need one TV in your house. Why do you have multiple phones? You only need one house phone. There's an extra car you aren't using, you need to give that car to someone who doesn't own one.
Who are you referring to? The rich?
The argument that the rich don't need all of their money is not a valid argument.
So what you're saying is that the rich need every single penny they earn to live or else they will die, and it is wrong to take from them because the desperately need it.
You consider taking some of the money from the rich to give to the poor, greedy? Greedy to who? The people who benefit because they cannot afford to pay for their children's healthcare or education?
Why do we have to rob people of their money to help others?
I assume you're not a fan of Robin Hood, are you?
It's impossible to argue against your logic.
Yay.
If you make one million dollars, you don't need all of it.
Exactly. Give it to people who need it more than you do.
But it's wrong to steal from someone just because they have extra or more than what they need.
It is also wrong to deny people healthcare because they are ill or cannot afford it. It is wrong to deny children education because their parent's cannot afford it.
Sell your xbox or Playstation and give that money to the poor.
The rich would never give to the poor without any reason to. Many of rich actually evade taxes.
You only need one TV in your house. Why do you have multiple phones? You only need one house phone. There's an extra car you aren't using, you need to give that car to someone who doesn't own one.
Who are you referring to? The rich?
The argument that the rich don't need all of their money is not a valid argument.
So what you're saying is that the rich need every single penny they earn to live or else they will die, and it is wrong to take from them because the desperately need it.
I think Barack Obama is trying to do his best. It's true he is not perfect and he is certainly not doing a whole lot on his part to help america but he at least is trying. I think he is a good president but has not gotten serious about running a country yet.
I think Barack Obama is trying to do his best. It's true he is not perfect and he is certainly not doing a whole lot on his part to help america but he at least is trying. I think he is a good president but has not gotten serious about running a country yet.
What do you think Obama can do to help this country?
