Do or Die
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-09-2016, 05:08 AM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 12:47 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  ... What is wrong with taxes? I know rich people don't like them.
No-one likes paying taxes.

(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  I also think it's not wrong to tax people more the higher income they earn.
Depends how much you tax people.
Heavy taxes are a disincentive for people to be successful in your country. It is a disincentive for them to build businesses or factories and hence to hire people in your country. The world is a globally integrated environment. If you make it expensive to do business in your country then the businesses (and jobs) will go off shore.

If you make it hard for businesses to start up and hard for businesses to succeed then again you will have lack of jobs.

(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  I know that there's potentially no right answer but for me it's the job of government to try to make sure that everyone in society has at least the opportunity to live a decent life.
By providing free schools and free health, it gives people equal opportunity. What they do with it is their choice.


(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  And if that costs people who've got lots of money a bit more, then so be it.
The rich and the business owners, aren't cash cows. they aren't there to be milked.
You cannot take advantage of them, they will leave, they will not start up businesses.


(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  Let's not forget that rich people take from society too. You can't *be* rich without interacting with society. You cannot acquire wealth without exchanging goods and services in the economy. So taxing you for the right to do so seems fair to me.
GST allows people to choose to pay tax if they want a good or service. All people pay it, criminals, wealthy and poor.


(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  At the same time, those who're poor... didn't choose to be that way.
I'm not so sure about that. Some people chose not to apply themselves at school. Some people chose to get a criminal record, some people chose to have kids early, chose to spend money on hire purchase, or alcohol or just on stuff in general. Many people have very poor self control and won't save, and didn't apply themselves at school.
If you have a degree and can't find a job that is one thing, but if you left school at 15, got pregnant at 16, 17 and 18, 19 and 20 then that is something entirely different. I tell you, I'm not rich but am comfortable. I don't have Sky or cable tv, I hardly every buy alcohol, I never gamble. I buy things when I can afford things, I go without when I can't. There are many poor people paying for Sky tv, having better car than me, going to the pub every week, gambling on TAB. I didn't have kids till quite late in life, once I'd got my career going and had save some money. I see many poor people getting knocked up really young, having many, many kids. For many, they make their choices. It isn't a conspiracy against them.

(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  So I don't see it as wrong or unfair that they should get government assistance.
Depends what the assistance is. If it is a lifetimes supply of money, then where is their incentive to work or gain some marketable skills?

(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  They are citizens too, the government has a requirement to serve them.
Giving them unconditional money makes them dependant, removes all incentives from them. It basically keeps them poor.
Taking from the rich ensures the country will be poor. The rich will leave. The jobs will be few.

(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  I've heard it said (I don't know how true it is) that if resources were distributed equitably we could eliminate poverty. This seems like a noble goal to me.
This sounds horrible to me.

You are telling people that it doesn't matter what they do. That they will have equal resources whether they work or stay at home and play computer games, or just hang out at the pub.

What will people do in this environment? They will give up, they won't need to work hard. They will expect to be given everything.


(29-09-2016 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  The alternative is to say that the existence of rich and middle class people is predicated on the existence of poverty i.e. that just the fact of being rich implies that somewhere there's someone else who doesn't have enough.
The alternative is to say, we will provide free quality school. We will encourage all to go to school and get qualifications and compete for jobs. We will support fledgling businesses, we will help them to get on their feet and to grow and employ people. We will encourage the rich to invest in our country to run factories and businesses, to create skilled labour, and to pay wages.
We will create an environment we those who choose to get educated or choose to start up businesses can succeed and reap rewards.

I don't have answers to your questions, but I will say that I am not proposing an "endless supply of money" to the poor, or that hard work should not be rewarded. At the same time the excuse of "oh, you'll just make them dependent" while it has some merit... I think a small handout is not a bad thing either. Unless you're prepared to watch people starve... which I have seen.

A lot of poor people did *not* get there by their free choice. They were born poor, they remain poor and nothing will ever change for them, in addition sometimes they *became* poor because of action of others. During the European industrial revolution lots of people became poor as the economy changed. During the colonisation of Africa whole swathes of people basically were robbed. Class warfare is actually a thing.

Sure, they get pregnant at 16 or they commit petty crimes. That's what happens when you grow up in a rough neighbourhood with crap education and lack of social services. Your society is definitely more advanced than mine if it does provide free education and health care though. Breaking that cycle is still the exception though, where IMO government has a responsibility to make it the rule.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
29-09-2016, 08:34 AM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 05:08 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 12:47 AM)Stevil Wrote:  No-one likes paying taxes.

Depends how much you tax people.
Heavy taxes are a disincentive for people to be successful in your country. It is a disincentive for them to build businesses or factories and hence to hire people in your country. The world is a globally integrated environment. If you make it expensive to do business in your country then the businesses (and jobs) will go off shore.

If you make it hard for businesses to start up and hard for businesses to succeed then again you will have lack of jobs.

By providing free schools and free health, it gives people equal opportunity. What they do with it is their choice.


The rich and the business owners, aren't cash cows. they aren't there to be milked.
You cannot take advantage of them, they will leave, they will not start up businesses.


GST allows people to choose to pay tax if they want a good or service. All people pay it, criminals, wealthy and poor.


I'm not so sure about that. Some people chose not to apply themselves at school. Some people chose to get a criminal record, some people chose to have kids early, chose to spend money on hire purchase, or alcohol or just on stuff in general. Many people have very poor self control and won't save, and didn't apply themselves at school.
If you have a degree and can't find a job that is one thing, but if you left school at 15, got pregnant at 16, 17 and 18, 19 and 20 then that is something entirely different. I tell you, I'm not rich but am comfortable. I don't have Sky or cable tv, I hardly every buy alcohol, I never gamble. I buy things when I can afford things, I go without when I can't. There are many poor people paying for Sky tv, having better car than me, going to the pub every week, gambling on TAB. I didn't have kids till quite late in life, once I'd got my career going and had save some money. I see many poor people getting knocked up really young, having many, many kids. For many, they make their choices. It isn't a conspiracy against them.

Depends what the assistance is. If it is a lifetimes supply of money, then where is their incentive to work or gain some marketable skills?

Giving them unconditional money makes them dependant, removes all incentives from them. It basically keeps them poor.
Taking from the rich ensures the country will be poor. The rich will leave. The jobs will be few.

This sounds horrible to me.

You are telling people that it doesn't matter what they do. That they will have equal resources whether they work or stay at home and play computer games, or just hang out at the pub.

What will people do in this environment? They will give up, they won't need to work hard. They will expect to be given everything.


The alternative is to say, we will provide free quality school. We will encourage all to go to school and get qualifications and compete for jobs. We will support fledgling businesses, we will help them to get on their feet and to grow and employ people. We will encourage the rich to invest in our country to run factories and businesses, to create skilled labour, and to pay wages.
We will create an environment we those who choose to get educated or choose to start up businesses can succeed and reap rewards.

I don't have answers to your questions, but I will say that I am not proposing an "endless supply of money" to the poor, or that hard work should not be rewarded. At the same time the excuse of "oh, you'll just make them dependent" while it has some merit... I think a small handout is not a bad thing either. Unless you're prepared to watch people starve... which I have seen.

A lot of poor people did *not* get there by their free choice. They were born poor, they remain poor and nothing will ever change for them, in addition sometimes they *became* poor because of action of others. During the European industrial revolution lots of people became poor as the economy changed. During the colonisation of Africa whole swathes of people basically were robbed. Class warfare is actually a thing.

Sure, they get pregnant at 16 or they commit petty crimes. That's what happens when you grow up in a rough neighbourhood with crap education and lack of social services. Your society is definitely more advanced than mine if it does provide free education and health care though. Breaking that cycle is still the exception though, where IMO government has a responsibility to make it the rule.

Essentially majority of his argument is the rich need carrot sticks and a warm bed .And the poor deserve a cattle prob and a bed of nails .To bad this principle while sounding reasonable on paper is of course antithetical to reality and human nature.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes OrdoSkeptica's post
29-09-2016, 11:00 AM
RE: Do or Die
If the rich want to leave, let 'em.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
29-09-2016, 11:07 AM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 11:00 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  If the rich want to leave, let 'em.

On the other hand, my employer could be considered rich, and if he leaves the country, I'm out of a job -- and not exactly mega-employable at age 61. So I kind of want him at least to stay.

Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2016, 11:21 AM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 11:07 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 11:00 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  If the rich want to leave, let 'em.

On the other hand, my employer could be considered rich, and if he leaves the country, I'm out of a job -- and not exactly mega-employable at age 61. So I kind of want him at least to stay.

Tongue

We can hire you as TTA proofreader.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
29-09-2016, 01:12 PM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 12:47 AM)Stevil Wrote:  Depends how much you tax people.
Heavy taxes are a disincentive for people to be successful in your country. It is a disincentive for them to build businesses or factories and hence to hire people in your country. The world is a globally integrated environment. If you make it expensive to do business in your country then the businesses (and jobs) will go off shore.

If you make it hard for businesses to start up and hard for businesses to succeed then again you will have lack of jobs.

Which creates and incentives the creation of tax havens, which do more harm than good. Corporations answers first to share holders, and fuck everyone else. Letting that greed run rampant hurts everyone.
I guess it comes down to your expectations of business owners.
I think their main goal is to make profit and returns for the investors. That's it. That is what they ought to do.

In order to do that, they probably need to make things that consumers want and at a price that consumers will pay.

In doing that they need to employ people, perhaps even educate employees, perhaps even build infrastructure, like roads, and power and water supply in order to support their factories. These are all beneficial and although not a goal of the business they are a consequence of a successful business.

It's not greed. It is the purpose of a business to give return on investment. Why else would you do it? Business isn't a charity, it isn't a cash cow.


(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Except if we are to be a pro-corporate as you sound to be, the incentive is to slash worker compensation; lest they go someplace else, right?
If you slash worker compensation then perhaps the best workers work for the competition instead. You need to do things to keep the best workers on board with your business.

(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Simply put, you cannot trust those whose sole goal is generating profit and capital, with safeguarding the rights and protections of your citizenry.
No, why would you. It isn't a business' purpose to safeguard rights and protections for citizenry, what on earth gave you that idea?

(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  That's why you need a government, that should ideally be acting for the benefit of it's people, and not international corporations.
It benefits no-one just to be giving money out like you have an endless supply. Money has to come from somewhere. If you support business then you have a source of income and a source of jobs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2016, 01:30 PM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 05:08 AM)morondog Wrote:  A lot of poor people did *not* get there by their free choice. They were born poor, they remain poor and nothing will ever change for them,
A friend of mine is a refugee from Vietnam. His parents came to our country with literally nothing, other than the parents (themselves) and three young kids.

They now own a home, and a rental and a business. Their kids went through school and their grand kids are now going through school and doing very well.

If education is free, there is great opportunity for a person born poor to get a degree and a high paid job and break the cycle.

Problem is when the family has poor attitude towards society and education and work. Have poor attitude towards saving and thinking about future. The problem starts in the home. Govt can only do so much. People need to be held accountable for themselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2016, 01:34 PM
RE: Do or Die
Stevil, do you think taxes are the only aspect of the business environment that drives business decisions on basing?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
29-09-2016, 02:01 PM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Which creates and incentives the creation of tax havens, which do more harm than good. Corporations answers first to share holders, and fuck everyone else. Letting that greed run rampant hurts everyone.
I guess it comes down to your expectations of business owners.
I think their main goal is to make profit and returns for the investors. That's it. That is what they ought to do.

Which is precisely why you cannot rely upon them to protect the best interest of your citizens.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  In order to do that, they probably need to make things that consumers want and at a price that consumers will pay.

Unless they have a monopoly, the end goal for every profit driven venture, the point at which they no longer have meaningful competition.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  In doing that they need to employ people, perhaps even educate employees, perhaps even build infrastructure, like roads, and power and water supply in order to support their factories. These are all beneficial and although not a goal of the business they are a consequence of a successful business.

Consequence of a successful business? Nope. You just described public works.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It's not greed. It is the purpose of a business to give return on investment. Why else would you do it? Business isn't a charity, it isn't a cash cow.

It is greed. Everything, including morality and ethics, is subservient to profit. That's not to say that you cannot be ethical, but that if being unethical can make you more money (and you can get away with it), then you're incentivized to be unethical. That's why business need regulations, because they cannot be trusted.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Except if we are to be a pro-corporate as you sound to be, the incentive is to slash worker compensation; lest they go someplace else, right?
If you slash worker compensation then perhaps the best workers work for the competition instead. You need to do things to keep the best workers on board with your business.

Unless they set up a hiring cartel with their competition, mutually agreeing with each other to artificially keep their wages lower and not scalp each other's talent, so that they all make more money from lower wages paid out to their employees. That shit can, and does, happen. In Silicon Valley, many of the largest tech firms (Apple, Google, Intel, etc.) have this gentleman's agreement in place. In a corporation, everything is subservient to profit.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Simply put, you cannot trust those whose sole goal is generating profit and capital, with safeguarding the rights and protections of your citizenry.
No, why would you. It isn't a business' purpose to safeguard rights and protections for citizenry, what on earth gave you that idea?

Just point out why they are not to be trusted, when you seem so willing to bend yourself over and let them fuck you in the ass with a smile on your face, lest they head off and go fuck someone else in your stead.


(29-09-2016 01:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 04:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  That's why you need a government, that should ideally be acting for the benefit of it's people, and not international corporations.
It benefits no-one just to be giving money out like you have an endless supply. Money has to come from somewhere. If you support business then you have a source of income and a source of jobs.

Income for who? In the United States, corporations are sitting on some of the largest piles of cash they have ever had, and they're not doing shit with it. They have the money to hire people, or pay better wages, but they're not. Why? Because it's a consumer driven economy, and the consumers are being squeezed. Wages have been stagnant for decades, so people's buying power hasn't increased. In their drive for profitability, they're killing off their own market. Every year that passes without a raise in wages, but the cost of living goes up, means there's less left over for the rest of the economy. Add to that the increased tax burden of the middle and lower class as the wealthiest people buy out the government and get favorable treatment for themselves? All that capitol sitting there, not moving, effective taken out of the economy; because the people they've been screwing over have less and less to buy their products. When consumers cannot consume because basic necessities take up an ever increasing amount of your time, effort, and energy, the very core of your consumer driven economy weakens and erodes. But why should the corporations care for the morrow? Their stock prices are awesome right now, and that's all that matters to them.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
29-09-2016, 02:16 PM
RE: Do or Die
(29-09-2016 01:30 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(29-09-2016 05:08 AM)morondog Wrote:  A lot of poor people did *not* get there by their free choice. They were born poor, they remain poor and nothing will ever change for them,
A friend of mine is a refugee from Vietnam. His parents came to our country with literally nothing, other than the parents (themselves) and three young kids.

They now own a home, and a rental and a business. Their kids went through school and their grand kids are now going through school and doing very well.

If education is free, there is great opportunity for a person born poor to get a degree and a high paid job and break the cycle.

Problem is when the family has poor attitude towards society and education and work. Have poor attitude towards saving and thinking about future. The problem starts in the home. Govt can only do so much. People need to be held accountable for themselves.

I think comparing immigrants and a resident underclass is misleading.

For one thing, the immigrant, a person who leaves their home country to settle in a new one overseas. They are anything but representative of normal. They are exceptional. As you point out, these guys arrive with their shirts on their back and they make it. It's impressive, but what you are ignoring is that it is also not normal.

To compare such an exceptional slice of a population to the weakest and suggest you have found the solution is misguided.

That most poor people cannot escape poverty without a helping hand should be rather obvious. Free education is good. As is good nutrition, hygiene, mental health etc.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like tomilay's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: