fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

"Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:39 pm

Well, now that it has passed, the mask comes off.

"...income shift"

"It's a leveling"

"..way too wealthy."

"...mal-distribution of income in America."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY4Qbv7gPbo&feature=player_embedded

Keep talking. We're listening.

222, 957 as of the 3/25/2010.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:42 pm

Wow, a few CEOs lose a couple hundred thousand dollars, when they took millions from the American people. I feel their pain.  
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
pilotsmoe
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 5:21 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:44 pm

Isn't this the whole point of insurance, to spread the risk(aka wealth)?
 
airtran737
Posts: 3234
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:47 pm

Quoting pilotsmoe (Reply 2):

I ahould not ne responsible for paying for the healthcare of anyone but myself. I don't care about my neighbors, so why should I pay for them?
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:51 pm

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 3):

I ahould not ne responsible for paying for the healthcare of anyone but myself. I don't care about my neighbors, so why should I pay for them?

You're right. You should go rob them at gunpoint and get your money back. As i've been saying. If you don't like it, you can go live off the grid and live a simple life where you can tend to yourself for your own health care, and you can dodge the IRS as much as possible.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9928
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:56 pm

Quoting pilotsmoe (Reply 2):
Isn't this the whole point of insurance, to spread the risk(aka wealth)?

Spreading risk is very different from redistributing wealth. In fact I can't think of how they are similar at all.

The forcible redistribution of wealth is wrong.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
Flighty
Posts: 7857
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Thu Mar 25, 2010 11:57 pm

Quoting pilotsmoe (Reply 2):
Isn't this the whole point of insurance, to spread the risk(aka wealth)?

Absolutely. Many commentators think it's _horrible_ that a person with cancer and a $100,000 bill pays the same low premium as a healthy mother who has few health problems.

That's the point of insurance. To take care of people. That's what insurance IS. Previously, when sick people were kicked out of the pool, and refused reentry, that is not insurance. It is simply a robbery, not health insurance at all.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9928
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:04 am

Quoting Flighty (Reply 6):

That's the point of insurance. To take care of people. That's what insurance IS

No it isn't. Insurance is a mechanism to spread risk over a wider breadth of time and depth of people. If you do not take insurance, you assume the full risk of a $100,000 operation, or having to replace the Bentley you crashed into.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
Flighty
Posts: 7857
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:21 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
No it isn't. Insurance is a mechanism to spread risk over a wider breadth of time and depth of people.

We are not in contradiction.

The risk is not absorbed by the insurance unless it plays by a sensible set of rules. If it accepts no sick people, and cancels the policy of people who become sick, then insurance no longer "insures" your health risks. Instead it is a way for powerful, clever men and women to take money from "the sheeple."  

Insurance is only useful if it is willing to pay out to sick people. If it does not, then it serves no purpose. Most people were born healthy. Each person may develop a health problem. In a sense, we all face the same risks over a lifetime. When insurance subdivides the population according to appetites and demographics, eventually it provides no value, because it cannot "redistribute" between the sick and the well. When insurance discriminates on the basis of health status, then the apocalypse has come and the game is over (See USA, recent times).

An essential problem is that healthy people find it disgusting that their tax money should take care of sick people. Yet, when those healthy people fall ill, society has an interest in healing them (and perhaps has some obligation). Employees at a company can share risk. But if a person is too sick to work, he or she must resign. Then that person can use COBRA awhile. Then if they are single, they are screwed.

Part of the reason why broad groups will be required to be insured is so that moral hazard doesn't prevent people from being opportunistic and getting insurance only when they are sick (in effect, destroying the insurance market). The general population won't be able to grasp how that works, but it's still valid.

Redistribution happens in company pools. Some employees are very sick. This cuts everybody's pay by a lot (since everyone has very expensive insurance). It's NOT fair. But it's a nice humane system. Nobody complains too much about the redistributive aspects of job-provided insurance.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9928
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:27 am

Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):
Insurance is only useful if it is willing to pay out to sick people. If it does not, then it serves no purpose. Most people were born healthy. Each person may develop a health problem. In a sense, we all face the same risks over a lifetime. When insurance subdivides the population according to appetites and demographics, eventually it provides no value, because it cannot "redistribute" between the sick and the well. When insurance discriminates on the basis of health status, then the apocalypse has come and the game is over (See USA, recent times).

Agreed, which is why I like the idea of flattening insurance rates for basic, minimum insurance, so that the rates for an adult, whether, male, female, fat, thin, whatever, should be the same.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
Ken777
Posts: 9101
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:56 am

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 3):
I ahould not ne responsible for paying for the healthcare of anyone but myself. I don't care about my neighbors, so why should I pay for them?

But your neighbors are taking care of you to some extent. And because they are you have a massive health infrastructure at your disposal any time it's needed.

In your age bracket the risks of accidents is probably your highest risk, but medical conditions like leukemia can hit at any age, taking you out of the workforce for a long time and hitting 6 digits of care very easily.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 6):
Absolutely. Many commentators think it's _horrible_ that a person with cancer and a $100,000 bill pays the same low premium as a healthy mother who has few health problems.

When it comes to women, cancer strikes all ages harder than men from what I have seen. Breast & uterine cancer -v- testicular & prostate on the male side. So that healthy mother may be 30 days from joining the current cancer patient.

The difference? The woman who has had, say, breast cancer and been through the expensive treatment is going to stay on top of things while the "healthy mother" may not be doing self exams on a monthly basis.

But both need basic health care and both should be covered.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Agreed, which is why I like the idea of flattening insurance rates for basic, minimum insurance, so that the rates for an adult, whether, male, female, fat, thin, whatever, should be the same.

I would go for that - especially if there is a public option available to hold premiums down.
 
airtran737
Posts: 3234
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:59 am

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 4):

Why should be up to me to pay for you? I have no problems paying my taxes, and believe me, am well versed enough to survive off the grid. You never told me why it is my responsibility, and your responsibility to pay for others? Why am I now paying for illegal alies to get healthcare? WHY? Next will we have government mandated auto insurance, where I will be forced to pay for the lazy bums who chose not to insure their vehicles?
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:03 am

America has a great history of redistribution of wealth ...its called charity. Over $300 billion given by US citezens every year to charitable orgs. But see the marxist dont like that ...they want to distribute it for politcal purposes. Its so easy to see why dont people get it ... ?
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
pgh234
Posts: 735
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:48 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:06 am

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 1):
Wow, a few CEOs lose a couple hundred thousand dollars, when they took millions from the American people. I feel their pain.

One day you will get a $10,000 bonus check or something yet only get to deposit $5000 into your checking account just so you can pay for everyone else's car, house, heath insurance, laziness in the job market, pointless war, and other general fiscal incompetencies...you will not be singing the same tune.

Quoting pilotsmoe (Reply 2):
Isn't this the whole point of insurance, to spread the risk(aka wealth)?

No...insurance is a product that you CHOOSE to purchase when you feel you want to spread your risk. It is like choosing to purchase new clothes or a new car or even a prostitute. It is a product that you feel is worth your hard-earned dollar. I dont think I should be allowed to tell you how to spend your money in your wallet. Do you?

Now if I WANT to give to my friends/family/neighbors, that is a different story...I can do it myself a hell of a lot more quick and efficiently without another giant government bureaucracy. Then again, it is pretty hard to do that when the government already takes away over 50% of what I make (federal, state, county, township, gas-tax, booze-tax, sales-tax, property-tax, parking-tax, amusement-tax, unemployment, medicare, etc)

[Edited 2010-03-25 18:10:26]
 
BMI727
Posts: 11170
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:17 am

Quoting pgh234 (Reply 13):

Exactly. I can choose if I want to be part of a risk pool. I don't need the government to make it mandatory.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
wn700driver
Posts: 1475
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:55 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:17 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 10):
I would go for that - especially if there is a public option available to hold premiums down.

So would I. But by voting in a last minute, ill advised mandate drawn up almost entirely by the insurance industry itself, we can kiss that goodbye for good.
Base not your happiness on the deeds of others, for what is given can be taken away. No Hope = No Fear
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:18 am

Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):
The risk is not absorbed by the insurance unless it plays by a sensible set of rules. If it accepts no sick people, and cancels the policy of people who become sick, then insurance no longer "insures" your health risks. Instead it is a way for powerful, clever men and women to take money from "the sheeple."  

   If insurance wasn't the word used here, anyone who did something like this would be a thief and everyone would want that person in jail. If a corporation tried this crap in China (not that I'm suggesting China is better) and the government found out about it the ones responsible would be literally shot in the middle of Tiananmen Square.

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 11):
Why am I now paying for illegal alies to get healthcare? WHY? Next will we have government mandated auto insurance, where I will be forced to pay for the lazy bums who chose not to insure their vehicles?

If you are fortunate to be able to afford a $200,000 cancer treatment for you or someone in your family which could easily happen at anytime in the future and can keep your house maintain your standard of living, then more power to you. But realize that this same unforeseen circumstance will likely bankrupt 99% of the US population.

If anything there has to be a system to protect people who fall under these circumstances.

Also you have mandates for auto insurance and you shouldn't be able to register a car without having a policy. Anyone who chooses to drive a car illegally pays the punishment for it if they get caught doing it.
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:22 am

Quoting pgh234 (Reply 13):

One day you will get a $10,000 bonus check or something yet only get to deposit $5000 into your checking account just so you can pay for everyone else's car, house, heath insurance, laziness in the job market, pointless war, and other general fiscal incompetencies...you will not be singing the same tune.

Dude i'm already bitching about taxes. Just because i'm 20 doesn't mean I don't have taxes deducted from my paycheck as well. What adults like yourself need to realize is that there are just some sacrifices we have to make to allow this country to be more prosperous.

Oh and your example was a little sensationalist IMHO.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
wn700driver
Posts: 1475
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:55 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:31 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 16):
Also you have mandates for auto insurance and you shouldn't be able to register a car without having a policy. Anyone who chooses to drive a car illegally pays the punishment for it if they get caught doing it.

You can choose not to have a car. But you really can't choose not to have a body. And it has to be your body, for better or worse...

Quoting starac17 (Reply 16):
  If insurance wasn't the word used here, anyone who did something like this would be a thief and everyone would want that person in jail. If a corporation tried this crap in China (not that I'm suggesting China is better) and the government found out about it the ones responsible would be literally shot in the middle of Tiananmen Square

I will agree with this though. Insurance companies have gotten away with too much for too long. That's my big beef here. All we've really accomplished is to subsidize the the troublemakers...
Base not your happiness on the deeds of others, for what is given can be taken away. No Hope = No Fear
 
pgh234
Posts: 735
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:48 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:34 am

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 17):
Oh and your example was a little sensationalist IMHO.

Well, that was not a fictional example! I am not going to provide a copy of my pay-stub for obvious reasons...but here is the story. My boss called me and thanked me for all of my hard work this year and said there was a 10K bonus check in the mail for me. I was ecstatic...then the check arrived...

$10,000 minus...
FICA: $765
Fed WH: $2500
State WH: $300
Local WH: $375
St Umemply: $8

$6052!!!

Then we subtract out of that the endless gas-taxes, amusement-tax, booze-tax, parking-tax, 7% sales-tax and I guarantee you the real number is far under $5000.

If you were a friend in need, or perhaps I was your employer...that is $5000 less that I have to share with you. But at least some horribly inefficient govt bureaucracy has it. Then they give some of it to all of the people leeching off of your tax dollars who sit at home everyday and have nicer cars and clothes than you...

And now my taxes will go even higher...

[Edited 2010-03-25 18:40:05]

[Edited 2010-03-25 18:47:30]
 
AirStairs
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 6:47 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:43 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 10):
But your neighbors are taking care of you to some extent. And because they are you have a massive health infrastructure at your disposal any time it's needed.

I don't want them to take care of me any more than they think appropriate and I will act the same way toward them. The fact is that for most rational people there are rational reasons to help others that have nothing to do with guilt trips or emotionality.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 10):
When it comes to women, cancer strikes all ages harder than men from what I have seen. Breast & uterine cancer -v- testicular & prostate on the male side. So that healthy mother may be 30 days from joining the current cancer patient.

The difference? The woman who has had, say, breast cancer and been through the expensive treatment is going to stay on top of things while the "healthy mother" may not be doing self exams on a monthly basis.

But both need basic health care and both should be covered.

And because insurance is about spreading risk, the ones who present higher risks should pay more for access to the pool.

Quoting starac17 (Reply 16):
Also you have mandates for auto insurance and you shouldn't be able to register a car without having a policy. Anyone who chooses to drive a car illegally pays the punishment for it if they get caught doing it.

But I can choose to not drive. The only way I can get out of the health insurance mandate is to.....not live
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:51 am

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 1):
Wow, a few CEOs lose a couple hundred thousand dollars, when they took millions from the American people. I feel their pain.

Wow, our government is talking about taking money from those that have some money and giving it to those without and you get on your bitchy hobby horse about overpaid CEO's.

That money is coming from me and, God willingly, you. You see, I want everyone in this country to prosper. But, there is no incentive to prosper when you take my money away and give it to someone who (take your pick):
-doesn't work as hard as me
-didn't go to school as long as me
-didn't do as well in school as me
-wasn't as lucky as me
-or just plain didn't catch the same breaks as me

Sometimes life is not fair. It is not up to government to make it so. It is up to government to ensure a level playing field...that's all.

You want to hear about some redistribution? My wife and I have always given a certain percentage of our income to St. Jude's Children's Hospital. Now that Obamacare is taking care of these kids for us, it probably won't happen again. Why? Not because I'm an evil conservative capitalist. Because the government has chosen to take my place as a charitable giver with my own money. Except now, it's not charity...it taxes.

I'm sorry, but this administration and congress and their attempts at making everyone equal will do far reaching damage to more things than my pocketbook. But, I'm really beginning to think that is want they want. I didn't think so at first, but I do now.

They want a welfare, nanny, cradle to grave state where we are dependant on government for everything.

I'm disgusted.

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 17):
Dude i'm already bitching about taxes. Just because i'm 20 doesn't mean I don't have taxes deducted from my paycheck as well. What adults like yourself need to realize is that there are just some sacrifices we have to make to allow this country to be more prosperous.

Dude, wait until these folks really get rolling. You'll be lucky to see half.

Taxes don't make a nation prosperous. A nation and its people are made prosperous by innovation and wealth creation. Both of which are destroyed by taxation.

Yes, taxes are necessary to make a country run...but this is ridiculous.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
AirStairs
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 6:47 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:54 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 21):
What adults like yourself need to realize is that there are just some sacrifices we have to make to allow this country to be more prosperous.

Let me know how far sacrificing your way to prosperity gets you.
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:58 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 16):
Also you have mandates for auto insurance and you shouldn't be able to register a car without having a policy. Anyone who chooses to drive a car illegally pays the punishment for it if they get caught doing it.

Want to make the comparison?

You don't have to drive, therefore you don't have to pay car insurance. My parents lived in NY for 25 years, never paid a dime for car insurance. Didn't own a car.

Car Insurance when necessary is a state mandate, not a federal one.

Car insurance does not allow 'pre-existing' conditions.

You can't buy car insurance after the wreck.

I can choose the level of insurance I want, down to the state minimum.

Should I keep going?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:03 am

Quoting wn700driver (Reply 18):
You can choose not to have a car. But you really can't choose not to have a body. And it has to be your body, for better or worse...
Quoting AirStairs (Reply 20):
But I can choose to not drive. The only way I can get out of the health insurance mandate is to.....not live

Ok I can't disagree with this when its put this way because both of you are 100% correct. However do you just let uninsured who can't afford to pay cash simply die, there has to be a better way to do things than that.

I personally think the mandate is a way to protect people from their own arrogance and stupidity to not buy health insurance.

Quoting AirStairs (Reply 20):
And because insurance is about spreading risk, the ones who present higher risks should pay more for access to the pool.

They should but there should be a capped maximum possibly based on a set percentage of your income. The main issue I have and this might be insane liberalism but it is that no one should have to lose everything because they get sick.
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10907
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:04 am

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 12):
its called charity

Last I checked charity was voluntary.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 21):
Taxes don't make a nation prosperous. A nation and its people are made prosperous by innovation and wealth creation. Both of which are destroyed by taxation.

  
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
pgh234
Posts: 735
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:48 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:08 am

Quoting AirStairs (Reply 22):
Let me know how far sacrificing your way to prosperity gets you.

Hard-work is how you succeed in the world...you EARN as much as put-in. Or at least that is how it used to be before this age of self-entitlement...now you expect everyone else to give you something and do not accept blame when you do not succeed.
 
CPH-R
Posts: 6064
Joined: Thu May 03, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:12 am

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 11):
Why am I now paying for illegal alies to get healthcare?

You aren't?
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:13 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 25):
I personally think the mandate is a way to protect people from their own arrogance and stupidity to not buy health insurance.

These would be the last people I'd want to help.

Life is full of choices, making stupid choices should not qualify you for my money.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5287
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:24 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 21):
Taxes don't make a nation prosperous.

Maybe not, but virtually every first world nation has a relatively high tax rate. The only countries with low tax rates tend to be 2nd/3rd world.

Quoting pgh234 (Reply 13):
It is a product that you feel is worth your hard-earned dollar. I dont think I should be allowed to tell you how to spend your money in your wallet. Do you?

And if you choose not to buy insurance and then get severely injured/sick, you're going to go to the ER where they will treat you and then dump the bill on those with insurance. By you choosing not to buy insurance, you are still having an impact on everyone else.

I do find it funny that conservatives are all worried about wealth being redistributed downwards, when for the past 40 years it has been steadily distributed upwards. I'm pretty leery of living in a country where soon 5% of the population will control 95% of the wealth. In fact, the reason taxes have to go higher on those with high wealth is that they are the only ones with any income to tax.
 
pgh234
Posts: 735
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:48 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:32 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 33):
I do find it funny that conservatives are all worried about wealth being redistributed downwards, when for the past 40 years it has been steadily distributed upwards. I'm pretty leery of living in a country where soon 5% of the population will control 95% of the wealth. In fact, the reason taxes have to go higher on those with high wealth is that they are the only ones with any income to tax.

I actually agree with this point for the following reasons:

1) More and more people work for the government. Since they do not produce anything of added-value to be taxed...the do not have a growing income base upon which we can tax. With our endlessly increasing liberal nanny-state (and endless pointless wars)...increased taxes need to pay for this crap.

2) Democrats have taxed out and Republicans have regulated out all of our well-paying American industry. Since most of the population does not produce things of added value anymore...the only people getting rich are those controling policy.

3) I am certainly not in the top 5% bracket...but I really dont give a crap about them. I care about MY deal, MY checking account, MY job, and MY successes and failure. I dont care about them. All I do know is the government is wasting more of MY money that I cant spend myself in a natural capitalist economy.

I have less and less incentive to produce more value on my own because the govt will just take even more of it away!

[Edited 2010-03-25 19:34:54]
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:47 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 33):
Maybe not, but virtually every first world nation has a relatively high tax rate. The only countries with low tax rates tend to be 2nd/3rd world.

And, just because all those first world nations have jumped into the abyss of debt, we have to? Please, that reasoning is specious.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
CPH-R
Posts: 6064
Joined: Thu May 03, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:55 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):
And, just because all those first world nations have jumped into the abyss of debt, we have to?

Nah, you managed the debt hole just fine without healthcare  
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:05 am

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 36):
Nah, you managed the debt hole just fine without healthcare

Yup, we did. And now we're just digging deeper and deeper.

But, what the hey...we'll all be equal...in mediocrity and dis-satisfaction.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:06 am

Quoting pgh234 (Reply 27):
Hard-work is how you succeed in the world...you EARN as much as put-in. Or at least that is how it used to be before this age of self-entitlement...now you expect everyone else to give you something and do not accept blame when you do not succeed.

I agree with this, however there comes a point where hard work becomes counter productive but this is an entirely different discussion altogether.

Quoting pgh234 (Reply 34):
2) Democrats have taxed out and Republicans have regulated out all of our well-paying American industry. Since most of the population does not produce things of added value anymore...the only people getting rich are those controling policy.

I don't blame the government for the loss of manufacturing jobs, the blame for this goes right to the short sighted management and greed of corporations, who found out that they can make the stuff in China or India paying the people $1 a day. There is nothing a government can do in an industrialized nation to compete with that.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 33):
Maybe not, but virtually every first world nation has a relatively high tax rate. The only countries with low tax rates tend to be 2nd/3rd world.

The reason is simple and its because there are things the government pays for that builds and sustains and the climate for success and prosperity. These things are usually infrastructure, education, law enforcement, and healthcare and some others.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):
And, just because all those first world nations have jumped into the abyss of debt, we have to? Please, that reasoning is specious.

Debt is and has never been a bad thing unless is has can be managed, its usually an investment.
Also while most industrialized countries have debt, most of them can manage it pretty well. Canada had been in the black for 10 or so years up until this past recession and our taxes rates while higher than yours are not out of control.

[Edited 2010-03-25 20:07:50]
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:19 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 38):

Debt is and has never been a bad thing unless is has can be managed, its usually an investment.

Agreed. I support deficit spending. You're right, it can be an investment. But, entitlements, by and large, are not investments. In order for a nation to manage its debt, it needs to have a steady revenue stream. That stream comes from its citizens in the form of taxes.

But, when the money that comes out is not used to grow the economy, but to simply grow government and entitlements (one in the same), the well dries up. Then, the all knowing and benevolent giver of entitlements feels obligated to give more, so it takes more and dries the well further. Eventually, you become Greece.

Transfer payments do not grow the economy. In order to maintain deficit spending, you MUST continue to grow your economy. Taking money from the producers and dropping it into the black-hole of entitlement spending and transfer payments stunts growth and innovation.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5287
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:22 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 35):

And, just because all those first world nations have jumped into the abyss of debt, we have to?

And its specious logic for you to assume all first world nations with high taxes are in an "abyss of debt." Australia has taxation that is high by American standards, but their debt is quite low. While the U.S. with lower tax rates has vastly higher debt (as a % of GDP).

The bottom line is that we've yet to see any country maintain a 1st world standard of living with the super low tax rates that conservatives crave. Maybe it can be done, but no country has managed it so far.
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:33 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 40):
Maybe it can be done, but no country has managed it so far.

It can be done if you have a resource valued a commodity like oil that is the property of the state that can generate enough revenue for the government to function without needing to tax the citizens. This however isn't sustainable forever.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 39):
But, entitlements, by and large, are not investments.

What would you consider to be an entitlement?
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:45 am

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 1):
Wow, a few CEOs lose a couple hundred thousand dollars, when they took millions from the American people. I feel their pain.

Oh no, they didn't "take" ANYTHING. They exchanged it, and everybody is better off because of it. They are wealthy because they CREATE things you don't and there is no "redistributing" creativity. Hence why communism or any other "wealth redistribution scheme" doesn't work -- it's not about "money". Money is spent and you return to poverty.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
seb146
Posts: 14331
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:52 am

Here's a thought: if you don't like "redistribution of wealth" how about not paying taxes AND never EVER calling police or fire or driving or walking on sidewalks or using the bus? Righties like that idea? I am so sick of the right whining about how they are the victims when all of this could have been avoided long ago by they THEMSELVES enacting a much better (according to them) version of health care reform.

Thom Hartman made a wonderful point today: Roll back the tax cuts on the wealthy to pre-Reagan days; when it was 74%. There were still the wealthy, but we all did pretty well from WWII to Reagan. According to a book (I wish I could remember which one) Hartman pointed out these financial bubbles did not happen until AFTER the Reagan tax cuts. In countries that do not have similar tax rates on the super wealthy, they have no financial bubbles and relativley strong economies.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
fr8mech
Topic Author
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:13 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 41):
What would you consider to be an entitlement?

Social Security, Medicare, VA Benefits, federal retirements and pensions, food stamps, unemployment, the Health Care junk, the perscription deal Bush got passed. Basically, anything that takes money from the tax payer through the government to the recipient with no value added. A transfer payment. Some are required and part of compensation and are necessary because they are promised for a service. Most are a give away.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 43):
Here's a thought: if you don't like "redistribution of wealth" how about not paying taxes AND never EVER calling police or fire or driving or walking on sidewalks or using the bus?

Nobody said anything about no longer paying taxes, just stop wasting my money. Police, fire, military, roadwork, etc. are all needs and public goods. They are required for our society to function. Too me, that's not a redsitribution of wealth, that's may tax dollars working for me to make my life easier and safer so that I can concentrate on being a productive member of society.

You get into redistribution when you take my money to give it to others in the form of products, services or outright payments.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
us330
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 7:00 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:20 am

I don't object to the concept of "redistribution of wealth" as long as the word "private" comes in front of it. If you want to redistribute your money on your own, then go right ahead.

Quoting pilotsmoe (Reply 2):
Isn't this the whole point of insurance, to spread the risk(aka wealth)?

But it's voluntary and private, it's not government mandated. Why shouldn't people be allowed to buy insurance if they feel that that is the best use of their money?

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 12):
America has a great history of redistribution of wealth ...its called charity

Exactly. Americans may pay lower taxes than the rest of the world, but we also give a larger percentage of our private income to non-profits and charities.

It's not that we don't care about people--it's just that we think, generally speaking, private organizations do a better, and more cost efficient, job at achieving their goals than government run organizations--with private organizations, if a program is failing, you either reform it or shut it down altogether--with government organizations, if a program is failing you continue to throw money at it, generally in increasing amounts as you think that the only reason why the program didn't succeed is lack of funds.

Obviously there are certain examples where a government run organization is necessary (police, fire, emergency services, army, navy, etc.)

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 11):
Why am I now paying for illegal alies to get healthcare?

Hate to say it, but you would be paying for their healthcare regardless of this bill. Emergency rooms, by law, have to treat everybody, even if they don't have medical insurance, and aren't allowed to ask immigration status. Technically, non-U.S. citizens get their bill sent to their government if they aren't able to pay for it themselves, but that bill that is passed on is often largely ignored. Thus, the American taxpayer ends up eating the cost of their treatment. This is becoming a huge issue in public hospitals near the border, in places like Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, etc.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20142
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:58 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
No it isn't. Insurance is a mechanism to spread risk over a wider breadth of time and depth of people. If you do not take insurance, you assume the full risk of a $100,000 operation, or having to replace the Bentley you crashed into.

Ah, but you don't assume the risk. You cannot pay $100K and so you wind up not paying it.

A better system would be this: you can't pay up front and you don't have insurance, you are not permitted through the door of the hospital even if you're dying.

I'd be fine with allowing people to conscienciously object to insurance, but only if they put their money and their lives where their mouths are and refuse all medical care for which they do not pay up front.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
iairallie
Posts: 2326
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 5:42 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:57 am

Quoting starac17 (Reply 35):
I agree with this, however there comes a point where hard work becomes counter productive but this is an entirely different discussion altogether.

Like when??

Quoting seb146 (Reply 40):
Here's a thought: if you don't like "redistribution of wealth" how about not paying taxes AND never EVER calling police or fire or driving or walking on sidewalks or using the bus? Righties like that idea?.

What a silly argument. How about letting me opt out of paying the portion of taxes that goes to fund things not in any of the above catagories? I'm fine with taxes for defense, infastructure and a justice system the rest of it is robbery.
Enough about flying lets talk about me!
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:58 am

Quoting US330 (Reply 42):
Obviously there are certain examples where a government run organization is necessary (police, fire, emergency services, army, navy, etc.)

Can you explain what the difference is between having a government run fire and police service is to having a government run healthcare system?

To me it is not obvious.
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:37 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 5):

Spreading risk is very different from redistributing wealth. In fact I can't think of how they are similar at all.

Easy. You lose your house in a fire. Houses are known to catch fire, for one reason or another, and sometimes to burn down completely. That represents a risk of losing the entire value of the house. The risk-spreading office refunds you the going price from a monetary fund that has been collected from the other clients of that particular risk-spreading office, the clients' collective wealth having been dimished by that same sum (+ overhead).

That way, instead of going broke and houseless, the recipient of the compensation can go on with his or her life -- while the other clients have not been substantially hurt either. This will represent an overall win-win situation, and is actually a quite popular arrangement in real life.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9928
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:40 pm

Quoting AverageUser (Reply 46):
That way, instead of going broke and houseless, the recipient of the compensation can go on with his or her life -- while the other clients have not been substantially hurt either. This will represent an overall win-win situation, and is actually a quite popular arrangement in real life.

Sorry that argument does not hold water. That is risk attenuation only. As you said, it's win-win, because all participants benefit in some way, either materially by getting their house repaired or simply peace of mind.

Voluntary income redistribution (like charity) is win-win as well, as one side gets money and the other feels good about himself.

Forcible income redistribution (through taxation) is win-lose. Some people get money at the expense of the rest, and you have no choice in the matter. If you resist, the IRS will destroy you.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:49 pm

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 1):
Wow, a few CEOs lose a couple hundred thousand dollars, when they took millions from the American people. I feel their pain.

WADR gotta run a slight correction there fp, millions were trousered, and that was a tad irritating but what was catastrophic was the hundreds of billions they managed to lose due to questionable business practices.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7857
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:04 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 47):
Forcible income redistribution (through taxation) is win-lose. Some people get money at the expense of the rest, and you have no choice in the matter. If you resist, the IRS will destroy you.

To some extent. But with health care, it can be win-win. This is why most jobs offer subsidized "group health insurance" instead of paying the cash out equally to all employees. The group health insurance is very very expensive now.

Overall, this is the model that already works in the USA. Most GOP critics are in effect condemning the collective model that supplies nearly all health insurance. They think their philosophy could design a more "freedom oriented" model, but they run into technical design issues. It's not possible to have a personal insurance unless we each keep $200,000 locked away as "self insurance" in case we are hit by a drunk driver. That would be incredibly inefficient, and people do not desire that anyway.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8650
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: "Redistribution Of Wealth"

Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:08 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 43):
Ah, but you don't assume the risk. You cannot pay $100K and so you wind up not paying it.

If I am liable for a debt I cannot repay, I don't get to shrug my shoulders and apologize. Someone is going to liquidate my assets and get as much as they can.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 47):
Forcible income redistribution (through taxation) is win-lose. Some people get money at the expense of the rest, and you have no choice in the matter. If you resist, the IRS will destroy you.

The truly frightening prospect is the intent to grow government welfare programs into dependency programs for the middle class. I have few objections to poverty-relief programs, but the recent healthcare bill will subsidize medical costs for a family of four up to $88,000 of combine income! The implication is that we are all entitled to equal standard of living despite the fact that we each have unequal talents and capabilities.

The result is that only a minority of Americans will be able to independently afford their standard of living and the majority will require wealth redistribution for their daily needs. We run the real risk that the majority will continue to vote itself more and more entitlements, drying up the productive capabilities of our nation.

Quoting starac17 (Reply 38):
What would you consider to be an entitlement?

An entitlement is a government program that collects revenue and redistributes it in an unequally, usually for the purpose of welfare. Examples include: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.

Quoting starac17 (Reply 25):
Ok I can't disagree with this when its put this way because both of you are 100% correct. However do you just let uninsured who can't afford to pay cash simply die, there has to be a better way to do things than that.

My personal opinion is that the government should cover the minimum standard of care for those below the poverty line and no more. Just as I believe food stamps should only cover basic staple foods. There must be incentives in life to achieve a high degree of productivity. Not everyone merits the most advanced medicine by default.

[Edited 2010-03-26 08:12:13]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sbworcs and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos