Gum, I don't think I understand what you are so insulted by. Is it the story of the girl that worked very hard in school and was put off by her father suggesting that she "donate" some of her hard earned GPA to a friend who has been screwing off while she had been working? Or is it the simplistic example of how & who (economically) bear taxes in our country? Your are correct that our government does not "reward hard work". Our government does not reward any work, our society rewards occupations that society thinks are important. During the 1800s Doctors were a poor profession. Now they are a rich profession (money wise). Black, green, brown, male, female, democrat or republican all come together in a free market and set the values on an occupation. It is our fault Lindsey Lohan makes what she does. In a free society , the government needs money to operate so the government outlines the tax structure. This post (imo) is about how our country taxes its citizens. Today in our country they are two schools of thought on taxation that matter in our country, the democratic view or the republican view. Typically your lot in life predisposes you to a particular view point on taxes. Out of college in 92' making $23,000 a year I loved the earned income tax credit checks I got. Now, being 38 and having built a fairly successful business I do not really understand why we have have an earned income tax credit. (As a side bar, I worked 70-80 hours a week for 10 years, moving my family all over the country building my current business. Now I have been able to move my corporate office back to BR and I work a lot less hours. My employees think they work a lot harder than I do, while making a less than I do. Some I am sure think this is not fair) Luck has a lot to do with our ability to generate financial wealth. Where you are born, when you are born or what family you are born into. However, there are many stories of people creating huge fortunes from nothing. Jon huntsman and john Menard are two examples. Both men have built billion dollar empires in the last 30 years from nothing. One is giving it all away the other is giving nothing away. In our country the haves pay the majority of taxes and they should. But when there is a tax break, the haves should get the break not the have nots who have paid little or nothing into the system. The child health care bill that Bush vetoed twice is a good example of government trying to help the poor. It originally was set to pay the health care for children with income less than $40,000 a year. The democrats raised the bar to $80,000 a year and bush vetoed it. If you are a single mother making $35,000 a year I could see where you could need some help paying your child's health care but to ask the government (and essentially the haves) to pay a child's health care of a single mother making $75,000 is ridiculous. It is socialized medicine. Sorry for digressing, I just did not know why you felt insulted by the story or the taxation example.
the story clearly associated hard-working with rich and lazy with poor. i was offended by that. it is one thing to have a political philosophy against wealth redistribution, but it is another thing (an obtuse and bigoted one) to label poor people lazy.
Gum, I agree that judging a book by the cover is stupid. Judging people without knowing them is stupid. I would imagine most of us on this board are a handfull of tragic events from being considered poor by our society. The real question is what is considered poor? Better yet, why is a specific indiviual poor? None of that though changes the redisturution of wealth model or our tax model. I am an Independent. I lean conservative and believe a capitalistic society works best. In a capitalistic society there has to haves and have nots. I also believe that villages should take care of its members that can not take care of themselves. So I pick and choose the aspects of both current political parties I like the best. I have no party to rise above.
Not all poor people are lazy, given. Many of them simply aren't capable. None the less, whether the girl friend is lazy or just dumb, does she deserve part of the daughter's GPA?
She may not be either lazy or dumb; just irresponsible. I suspect that is the key problem with a lot of people.
true. as i posted, i was insulted by the obvious and absolute connection of poor people and laziness. i was not debating the US tax system right on. join the club. somehow i dont feel this is true for many posters here (especially the thread starter).
of course not, but that story is stupid. GPAs are a way to measure scholastic aptitude/acheivement. redistribution of wealth is a way to raise the standard of living of the least fortunate.
By redistributing GPA's, you are essentially redistributing standard of living because the higher your GPA, on average, the higher your salary. Why should stupid people have to suffer with the embarassment & shame of poor grades plus the lack of job opportunities when the simple solution would just be to redistribute the "wealth". The comparison is not that far off, you'd just like it to be.
pure capitalism allows rich people to leave stupid people in the gutter (how low would wages go if there wasnt the already insanely low federal minimum wage?). i would like my country to keep them out of the gutter. if the US can give billions in farm subsidies we should be able to attempt to keep the poorest on their feet. i cant really keep people out of the gutter myself, so i will gladly pay more taxes to do it. but first, id prefer the rich to pay their share. equity in payroll taxes would be a good start.
