Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 85

Thread: "Spreading the wealth around" is a bad thing???

  1. #1
    Tiger's Avatar
    Tiger is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,171

    Default "Spreading the wealth around" is a bad thing???

    Jiminy Christmas! Amd I just a blind non-Christian idiot, or what? How is spreading the wealth around a bad thing? I, for one, am totally ready for a "transformational shift" in this country, away from the Bush/McCain strategy of making the rich ever richer, and the ultra-rich even more rich! It's insanity!

    What about compassion, for children, for mothers, for those who work hard and never get ahead? Trickle down is not working, get over it.

    Okay, there's my Sunday rant.
    T

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger View Post
    Jiminy Christmas! Amd I just a blind non-Christian idiot, or what? How is spreading the wealth around a bad thing? I, for one, am totally ready for a "transformational shift" in this country, away from the Bush/McCain strategy of making the rich ever richer, and the ultra-rich even more rich! It's insanity!

    What about compassion, for children, for mothers, for those who work hard and never get ahead? Trickle down is not working, get over it.

    Okay, there's my Sunday rant.
    T
    You bring up a good point and a question I've been meaning to ask. In the shouting war here and in this political race, I have not heard one word about the role of religious organizations and charities in helping the poor and those who need a hand up.

    My view is that raising taxes further discounts the role that these organizations play. I confess I haven't done my homework on Bush's Faith-Based Initiatives, but I'm wondering what if any impact they have had.

    Anecdotally, my DH is deacon at our church and they have noted that giving has declined a bit over the last month in light of recent financial insecurity. Requests for benevolence are up. Fortunately we have a large benevolence fund and a generous congregation and are able to meet these needs at this time. This is the church (or synagogue or mosque or community group) at work.

    Why taxes are viewed as a negative way as helping these people is that the govt is saying "we know best how to disburse these funds" but so many $$$$ get lost in bureaucratic overhead. Plus very few govt programs have really proven themselves with long-term success in these areas.

    So it's an interesting topic for conversation . . .

  3. #3
    julied is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    897

    Default Maybe it's just the wording....

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger View Post
    Jiminy Christmas! Amd I just a blind non-Christian idiot, or what? How is spreading the wealth around a bad thing? I, for one, am totally ready for a "transformational shift" in this country, away from the Bush/McCain strategy of making the rich ever richer, and the ultra-rich even more rich! It's insanity!

    What about compassion, for children, for mothers, for those who work hard and never get ahead? Trickle down is not working, get over it.

    Okay, there's my Sunday rant.
    T
    I don't have a problem with my taxes going to build roads, freeways, hospitals, bridges, running post offices, healthcare (although there's a limit), DMVs, military, other civic functions, Back-to-work intiatives, food stamps, jails, even needing to help out a city's orchestra (I thought the $3million projector out of Chicago wasn't really that big of a deal, but BOY is that expensive!), some subsidies (although I think most should go away), some pork barrel spending for projects that otherwise would probably NEVER get realized, parks, libraries, dams, etc.

    I guess I just don't like the idea that it should go from one person's pocket directly into another's pocket because one makes more than another...It just seems like the uncle who's always giving JR money on the side - eventually he comes to expect it, even starts to feel entitled to the uncle's money. It just rubs me the wrong way. Now maybe if the Uncle helped Jr pay for college or something like that where Jr has to apply himself a little, I'd feel differently - but just lining his pockets so he can go buy beer or whatever....bleh.

  4. #4
    zoeyz is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger View Post
    Jiminy Christmas! Amd I just a blind non-Christian idiot, or what? How is spreading the wealth around a bad thing? I, for one, am totally ready for a "transformational shift" in this country, away from the Bush/McCain strategy of making the rich ever richer, and the ultra-rich even more rich! It's insanity!

    What about compassion, for children, for mothers, for those who work hard and never get ahead? Trickle down is not working, get over it.

    Okay, there's my Sunday rant.
    T
    Okay I just deleted my responding rant. I'll just say that I don't understand this mentality that we are entitled to take someone else's money because they have more of it. I will never, ever understand that.

  5. #5
    Tiger's Avatar
    Tiger is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,171

    Default Because not everyone has the same advantages?

    I'm not as eloquent as most on this board, but in my worldview I'm clearly able to see that my middle class upbringing with college-educated parents, and plenty of college-education for myself, has given me worlds of advantages that millions of Americans just don't have. Oh, and I'm white and heterosexual, so I've never had to deal with the discriminatory policies and legacies of racial or sexual-preference bias.

    I simply see it as a moral prerogative; help those less able, help those less societallly blessed, help the downtrodden, help those who can't help themselves.

    And, although I am not a Christian, I have a strong religious faith and belong to a very vital religious community whose tenets and actions support those who for some reason can't always do for themselves.

    I don't have any statistics on Bush's Faith-Base Initiatives program but to me it always seemed like an enormous cop-out by the Bush administration..."we prefer to give money directly to the ultra-rich and the oil companies, let's let the churches handle the poor."
    T
    Last edited by Tiger; 10-19-2008 at 07:23 PM.

  6. #6
    freddy is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by julied View Post

    I guess I just don't like the idea that it should go from one person's pocket directly into another's pocket because one makes more than another...It just seems like the uncle who's always giving JR money on the side - eventually he comes to expect it, even starts to feel entitled to the uncle's money.
    I don't know who's suggesting just lining people's pockets with some rich man's money. For one thing, you are right, that doesn't 'help' anybody, because creating a dependent welfare class isn't helpful. But there are other ways to distribute the wealth, that we pretty much come to expect as normal.

  7. #7
    maryellen is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger View Post
    I'm not as eloquent as most on this board, but in my worldview I'm clearly able to see that my middle class upbringing with college-educated parents, and plenty of college-education for myself, has given me worlds of advantages that millions of Americans just don't have. Oh, and I'm white and heterosexual, so I've never had to deal with the discriminatory policies and legacies of racial or sexual-preference bias.

    I simply see it as a moral prerogative; help those less able, help those less societallly blessed, help the downtrodden, help those who can't help themselves.

    And, although I am not a Christian, I have a strong religious faith and belong to a very vital religious community whose tenets and actions support those who for some reason can't always do for themselves.

    I don't have any statistics on Bush's Faith-Base Initiatives program but to me it always seemed like an enormous cop-out by the Bush administration..."we prefer to give money directly to the ultra-rich and the oil companies, let's let the churches handle the poor."
    T
    Yes, and because lifting up the least of our brothers lifts us ALL up. Paraphrasing here, but a team is only as strong as its weakest member.

  8. #8
    twinks is offline INCIIDer - A Community Creator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    You said " I simply see it as a moral prerogative; help those less able, help those less societallly blessed, help the downtrodden, help those who can't help themselves."

    That is absolutely wonderful when people are given the *choice* to do that. When the government is forcing you to do it by taxing you at a much higher rate than the rest of society, it's called socialism ... plain and simple.

    Why on earth should anyone be ok with spreading the wealth around??? I guess it's just because it doesn't affect them? Or they are directly benefitting from taking from the rich to give to the poor?

    Not to mention that the whole definition of rich is subjective.

  9. #9
    AnnieA1998 Guest

    Default The $3 Million Dollar Projector

    Quote Originally Posted by julied View Post
    I don't have a problem with my taxes going to build roads, freeways, hospitals, bridges, running post offices, healthcare (although there's a limit), DMVs, military, other civic functions, Back-to-work intiatives, food stamps, jails, even needing to help out a city's orchestra (I thought the $3million projector out of Chicago wasn't really that big of a deal, but BOY is that expensive!), some subsidies (although I think most should go away), some pork barrel spending for projects that otherwise would probably NEVER get realized, parks, libraries, dams, etc.

    ....
    The way Sen. McCain has phrased it suggests that Sen. Obama approved spending $3 million on an old-fashioned piece of office equipment (overhead projector).

    The 3 million is actually for an upgrade of the SkyTheater - a full dome projection system, which is probably the main attraction of the Adler Planetarium and is quite sophisticated and impressive piece of equipment.
    I find it appalling that Sen. McCain would call a science education tool for public (largely children) for a historic planetarium with millions of visitors a year a wasteful earmark. The planetarium's focus, as stated on their website (http://adlerplanetarium.org) is "on inspiring young people, particularly women and minorities, to pursue careers in science." Is an investment in such public facility at the time when US competitiveness in math and sciences is a constant source of alarm a waste?

    "American's ability to compete in a 21st Century economy rests on our continued investments in math and science education," said Rep. Brian Baird, Chairman of the Research and Science Education Subcommittee in Congress, after the passage of The 21st Century Competitiveness Act of 2007.
    Considering such investments "wasteful earmarks" today, even in the face of the financial crisis, will severely cripple US economic competitiveness in the increasingly high-tech world down the road.
    Andrey Kravtsov, Chicago, IL
    http://www.eandppub.com/2008/10/that-3-million.html

    To use this the way it was used in the debate is not only negative but also deceptive -- and right up the alley of the GOP and Rove tactics --
    It was said to purposely mislead the public --- that is a lie.

  10. #10
    AnnieA1998 Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zoeyz View Post
    Okay I just deleted my responding rant. I'll just say that I don't understand this mentality that we are entitled to take someone else's money because they have more of it. I will never, ever understand that.
    I think you are missing the point -- there are a lot of people who think our tax structure is off balance. There are a lot of economists who think this is one of the reasons that our economy is so out of wack.

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •