Tax the rich!!!

[Velociryx]

Ahhh, Poker! Makin' some side money the old fashioned way...stealin' it...

-=Vel=-
(yep, I supplemented my income the same way....fond memories of Poker Night)

[David Floyd]

compare the societies too. In america we are tought (much from calvinism) that work is our purpose. It is what we are put here to do and that wealth is a sign of divineness.

The problem i have with american society, and western society in general is that the emphasis in life is what you can accumulate over your lifetime. What can you do with your means over your life.

Personally i dont believe that the meaning of life is to work. To me a better life is doing what makes you happy, and brings happiness to other people.

Now how does this tie into the taxes of the rich and so on and so forth. I believe that part of making the world and our society a better place is being able to provide for each person basic services that i think are neccesary. Health care, college education are small steps.

So what you are basically saying is that because you don't believe that the point of life is to work a lot to earn money to buy "stuff", we should take away as much money as we can in order to create some "happy" society, where everyone shares in the wealth equally.

That's just not gonna fly. You may not think the point of life is to accumulate possessions, and that's fine. Most people in the US don't agree with you, though That's why we don't have a socialist-type system like much of Europe, and we really aren't going to anytime soon, either. Our leftist party is as right as some European right wing parties, if that's any indication.

[OzzyKP]

Kid and others: what is "real poverty"? How do you define when someone is poor? Just curious. In real terms.

[MRT144]

im not saying that. Im saying to provide a decent life to as many people as possible we need to reform our society. taxing the rich is a step in the right direction as doing so can provide services to people who need them and cant afford them.

and a happy society isnt one that redistributets wealth nor is it one where its every man for himself in a race to be rich. a happy society is one where you can achieve happiness by doing something valuable for society and yourself, and that is encouraged by others.

[KrazyHorse]

Ozzy

Come to Baltimore.

Stand on the corner of 23rd and Greenmount

That's poverty.

[OzzyKP]

Give me a real answer. What is poverty?

[MRT144]

not being able to provide the means of exsistence for yourself. food, shelter, clothing, meaning ( a purpose to living)

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Give me a real answer. What is poverty?

I just did.

When your house is falling down, your kids go to a dangerous, ****ty inner-city school, your neighbourhood is infested with dope dealers and you can't afford to move.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Kid and others: what is "real poverty"? How do you define when someone is poor? Just curious. In real terms.

Inability to afford an adequate standard of consumption.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And who determines adequate standard of consumption. Seems incredibly arbitrary.

I'd say MRT has a good definition. If you can provide food, shelter, and clothing for you and your family you aren't in poverty.

[KrazyHorse]

No, then you aren't in abject poverty.

Poverty in and of itself does not imply starvation. It never has. It just means that you do not have very much at all. By nature it is an arbitrary definition.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd
You may not think the point of life is to accumulate possessions, and that's fine. Most people in the US don't agree with you, though

I don't believe that most Americans believe that the point of life is to accumulate possessions. Our culture has taught us that accumulating goods keeps the economy going, and that that allows us to meet our other goals and maintain our quality of life. American's believe that accumulating goods is the means, not the ends. They believe wrong.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And who determines adequate standard of consumption. Seems incredibly arbitrary.

I'd say MRT has a good definition. If you can provide food, shelter, and clothing for you and your family you aren't in poverty.

You need more than that in an advanced society.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You need more than that in an advanced society.

No, not really. Otherwise, what is poverty? Under $20,000 a year? Under $30,000 a year? Under $40,000 a year? You may get 3 different answers. How do you come to any sort of consensus ever?

I'd say a family which makes $30,000 a year isn't poor, but I'm sure you'd disagree.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You need more than that in an advanced society.

No, not really. Otherwise, what is poverty? Under $20,000 a year? Under $30,000 a year? Under $40,000 a year? You may get 3 different answers. How do you come to any sort of consensus ever?

I'd say a family which makes $30,000 a year isn't poor, but I'm sure you'd disagree.

I made 40k when I lived in Ventura, CA. My rent was $1255 and I was paying on my college loan. I would say that I was barely above the poverty line with a family of three. Of course, I owned a car and things like that. I needed a car to get to work though. Things are expensive. 30k is only 'adequate' in some places, but you won't have any savings, and you really need savings in a capitalist economy.