Is the redistribution of wealth and resources just to alleviate poverty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is taxation considered forced surrender of wealth? Are stiff inheritance taxes unjust?

LOVE! ❤️
In Germany there is currently a 50% payroll tax, along with high sales tax. The unemployment rate in some European nations is also close to 50%.

Is that just?

How much more tax would be required there to satisfy all the hungry in the world? An 80% payroll tax with a 80% unemployment rate?
 
I have nothing to do with them. I do not know them, they have their own lives separate from mine. I will not help them regardless of emotion.

I will help my children, and everyone else’s children who live within my nation -the United States of America. I will sacrifice my life for these people only. These people are my only neighbors.
Your post is very close to that of kinism.

You are also a Catholic, which means universal, that means you are also a member of the church that is worldwide.
 
Ugh. :doh2:

You do realize that “redistribution” requires the forced surrender of possessions, right?
Redistribution need not be forced. If you gave willingly to help the less fortunate than that is redistribution. If everyone or most of us gave willingly of our time, treasure and talent, that is redistribution.

People assume redistribution is forced. It may. If it is forced it’s nothing but theft. I don’t care who is doing it. It still is theft.

Now the sticking point is that the obligation of a citizen may include paying taxes. How much is the point of debate.
 
Your post is very close to that of kinism.

You are also a Catholic, which means universal, that means you are also a member of the church that is worldwide.
I don’t appreciate unity in excess. It’s not good in all ways in all situations… Many Catholics are blind to this due to the term “universal”.
 
Many ancient European tribes were more than willing to abandon their current system and join the Roman Empire -it was to their benefit. But the Empire could never really handle all that it had acquired. When Rome fell, Germanic tribes were more than willing to take the throne… Rome was sacked!

After that, the nations were assigned and separation allowed nature to take place. Some nations prospered while others fell and were replaced -they didn’t all fall together again.

…so why the desire to rebuild the empire knowing that a big fall leads to a big crash? And allowing bad ideologies such as socialism and secular humanism -which haven’t been adequately tested? It’s risky.
Because the alternative of major wars on increasing scales approximately every other generation is unacceptable.

ICXC NIKA.
 
Redistribution need not be forced. If you gave willingly to help the less fortunate than that is redistribution. If everyone or most of us gave willingly of our time, treasure and talent, that is redistribution.

People assume redistribution is forced. It may. If it is forced it’s nothing but theft. I don’t care who is doing it. It still is theft.

Now the sticking point is that the obligation of a citizen may include paying taxes. How much is the point of debate.
What matters to me is where the US tax dollars go, and how they’re spent. If they’re leaving the country I’m totally opposed.

Also, let’s keep in mind the term “distribution”… The Distribution of wealth in the States is fine -redistribution means distributing the same things again. Not good.
 
Because the alternative of major wars on increasing scales approximately every other generation is unacceptable.

ICXC NIKA.
Interesting point. 👍

Still though, I think we’re missing the core of the problem in solving it.
 
Off course it is. The faithful are called to it; and the Church refers to it as alms giving!
 
Alms giving is not done at gun point!

ICXC NIKA
I think we have to define exactly what redistribution means. For me it can either be voluntary, I.e., alms giving or involuntary.

There seems to be an idea here that redistribution is always involuntary.

This is not always the case.
 
If the hot-button terminology was “legitimate distribution of resources”, I would have a totally different attitude.

But to ‘re-distribute wealth’, is the evaluation of all peoples monies by the State, and the redistribution of those monies as the State sees fit to whomever in the world the State sees fit. IOW, pure socialism bordering communism. On a global scale.
 
Don’t be a drama queen/king…nobody said at the end of a gun, nobody is having their property taken at gun point!!🤷
Complete refusal to comply with the state will always place you at the end of a gun. That’s guaranteed.
 
I don’t believe in forced communism. It has to be a voluntary sharing of the wealth.
 
Here’s my take on redistribution of wealth:

I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn.

Do you disagree?

Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?”
 
Here’s my take on redistribution of wealth:

I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn.

Do you disagree?

Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?”
What makes you think you deserve what you earn? What if you some mafia killer?
 
There is nothing fair about forced redistribution of wealth and resources either.
So you are against the forced vacuuming of wealth from the middle and lower classes to the upper? Good for you!

Equity in wealth will be fought against tooth and nail by the ultra rich. Their psychometrists have trained very many to call it “forced redistribution of wealth,” “socialism” and other things with a negative emotional sense. You see, the point of poverty is less one of money than of leisure. The word “school” derives from a word meaning “leisure.” What is the importance of that? The importance of that is that if there is a living wage for all, there will be time for leisure, and therefore thought. A thinking public is far less easily controlled.

Why do you think our restrictive educational policies have had this nation slip from 1st to 20th, even 47th, in many areas, compared to other developed nations? Further, if there is time to think, an increasingly greater portion of the public will understand that money, as we use it, without knowing, is debt. In other words, if there was no debt, in countries like ours which use fiat currency, multiplying it many times over by the fractional reserve system of banking, there would be NO money. None. Paying off the collective National Debt = no cash. 0. Why? because it is imaginary money with no backing that was created into existence by the same laws that allow sucking it up from the bottom to an unimagined concentration at the top

So a chief purpose of poverty, and why there is such a great effort by our lobbied Congress to foster poverty and all that goes with it, even death as we are now seeing, is to keep people from having time to think about the actual source of their woes. And that source is not scarcity: There is way enough to go around and more, if we so willed it. But there is a deliberate deprivation, and there is a deliberate agitation of differences and blame to distract from the actual bonfire. The bonfire is that the .001% of the 1% is to the 1% as the 1% is to the 99%. In fact, the ordinary individual cannot begin to comprehend how rich these rich actually are, and they are that way because they print money for free in the form of loans, and you, yes you, add value to the loaned imaginary money by your labor.

That is why when asked his thoughts about the fractional reserve, a certain VP of an international bank laughed heartily and said “Fractional reserve is the biggest scam ever pulled on mankind!” So, dear ones, understand this: The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE company that creates debt called money by loans to the government at the cost of interest. The IRS is the branch of the government we pay for to collect money for ourselves to give to the PRIVATE individuals who own the stock of the Federal Reserve, which is neither Federal, or a “reserve,” saves it does everything to reserve the secret of its magic powers to itself.

This is why Jefferson argued heatedly and long against a private bank. He knew, not because he was a fortune teller, but because he knew the nature of private banking, that we would have exactly the financial crisis we have today. He knew, because it is built into the system. So if you want to know how it works, and how it is that one family in Europe could literally feed the world four times over, even the p[art feeding itself, read http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyll-Island-Edward-Griffin/dp/0912986409/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1399856265&sr=1-5&keywords=funny+money”]this, or this. And if then you decice you don’t like money in politics, and are tired of scraping by, consider joining WolfPac and MayOne.us
 
Here’s my take on redistribution of wealth:

I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn.

Do you disagree?

Well then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you - and why?”
What did you earn when you were an infant? OK then, infants have to earn their own way! How about the sick and dying? Right Let them rot! (you too, Zoltan, when you can’t earn any more, or if your savings run out) Soldiers what defended your way of life, returning to no jobs? Heck, let them die for their country and you Zoltan. Single mothers abandoned? Hey, there are plenty of jobs out there at minimum wage that don’t pay costs and keep the mom away from the kids! Tough luck, Mom! Streets? Fire protection? Police? Ambulances? Who the heck needs those? To hell with them all, right Zoli? (It’s ok, it was my Dad’s name too. He spent his life fighting hardasses who had the attitude toned by your post.).

If you are living at a poverty wage, I sure don’t expect you to pay taxes. None. If you are making 5-10K an hour on other people’s backs, it is responsible maintenance to take care of the citizenry. Even if you don’t want to. As history tells us, the best way for a republic to fail is to institutionalize great inequity. The question is in the word “earn.” Printing money for free as loans isn’t earning, it is extorting. Breaking your back in hard labor to keep a family alive at minimum wage just is unfair and irresponsible.

Money in the world’s so called “democratic” nations has been created through debt for more than the last 200 years by the private banking system that has been restoring what was once in history a feudalistic (non-democratic) existence for the masses. The money created in this system has been, and is cause for all our booms and busts. We have got so used to its enslavement that we (especially governments believing in their economic advisers) cannot imagine the absence of “legally fraudulent” banks. In a sane system, the kinds of questions we are fighting with wouldn’t exist, or be greatly alleviated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top