So people who become successful should be damned? You do realize the wealthiest of men employ hundreds of thousands of people, creating a livelihood right?ruisleipa wrote:
complete bullshit I'm afraid.Cybargs wrote:
And you can never make enough money.
The statement 'you can never make enough money' is total bullcrap. Of course you can make 'enough' money.Cybargs wrote:
So people who become successful should be damned? You do realize the wealthiest of men employ hundreds of thousands of people, creating a livelihood right?ruisleipa wrote:
complete bullshit I'm afraid.Cybargs wrote:
And you can never make enough money.
Then what is "enough."ruisleipa wrote:
The statement 'you can never make enough money' is total bullcrap. Of course you can make 'enough' money.Cybargs wrote:
So people who become successful should be damned? You do realize the wealthiest of men employ hundreds of thousands of people, creating a livelihood right?ruisleipa wrote:
complete bullshit I'm afraid.
The issue of whether you can do that has fuck all to do with employing people or being successful.
The idea you cannot make enough money is only attractive to people who view the acquisition of money to be the goal of life rather than anything more, y'know, important, or moral, or whatever.
So people who make more than 5 mil should just give their money away and stop working right?ruisleipa wrote:
well that is a question the answer to which varies depending on who you ask. IMO enough is you can afford to provide for yourself and your family. Pretty simple tbh although practically impossible to put a specific amount on it. A million? definitely enough.
5 mill - too much
a billion - you're an obscene fat rich fucker
Cubic zirconia > standard diamond fare. I guess I'd have to find a geologist gal if I wanted my choice of engagement rings to be appreciated.JohnG@lt wrote:
Diamonds are rather worthless. Their price is only propped up by the DeBeers cartel. If DeBeers ever opened up its vaults, diamonds would be worth pennies on the dollar compared to what they go for now.Varegg wrote:
Money isn't everything ... there is also gold and diamonds
So...where did I say all money rich people earn goes back into the system?Vilham wrote:
Where did I say it did? All I have said is that suggesting the money rich people earn goes back into your own economy is such a retarded statement.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Putting pressure on rich people with taxes just because they're rich isn't going to help the job base expand.Vilham wrote:
Not at all, but rich people will play people to launder their money, saying all the money rich people earns goes back into the system is plain fucking retarded.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-05-01 02:34:39)
Money is nothing without water.11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
You try to claim I know nothing then make a bullshit statement like above. If you claim is correct why is the income disparity always rising in a capitalist economy?Cybargs wrote:
You have to take into the account of the creation of wealth as well. The rich usually invest in business', buying stocks, commodities etc, making productions cheaper, which passes down to the savings of the consumer.Spark wrote:
curious - what does economics say about the relative, er, "efficiencies" of the rich compared to the poor in recycling money into the economy? I.e. as a proportion of their income how effective are they comparatively putting money back into the economy?Cybargs wrote:
Planning to graduate from Stern school of business.
I'm not saying EVERYONE in the thread doesn't understand concepts of econ, but most don't. As John has said, money is always circulated. If you invest money in another country, the wealth created benefits the local populace at first, but trickles down to the global community.
And you can never make enough money. Why have we as a society demonized the rich and successful? Making money and stealing is not the same thing (Maddof lelz).
(probably makes no sense, but anyway)
The lower classes earn money from jobs, then spend it on consumer goods and invest a lot less compared to the upper classes.
The rich usually are the ones who drive the economy more. Investing circulates the money and most of the time has a trickle down effect (employment, production, profits etc).
"Which in a way" is totally not putting it back in unless that company makes a loss.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So...where did I say all money rich people earn goes back into the system?Vilham wrote:
Where did I say it did? All I have said is that suggesting the money rich people earn goes back into your own economy is such a retarded statement.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Putting pressure on rich people with taxes just because they're rich isn't going to help the job base expand.
At any rate, a great deal of it is invested into other companies, which in a way is putting it back.
without water nothing is important. dont be cute.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Money is nothing without water.11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
should they be philanthropic? Yes, I believe they should.Cybargs wrote:
So people who make more than 5 mil should just give their money away and stop working right?
A million dollars is nothing really... When you think about raising kids...
no11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
what is more important?Beduin wrote:
no11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
Look, I'm just going to call it facepalm and let you think all rich people are carbon copies of Mr. Burns. The government is not going to help the economy by pulling wealth out of it, then pretending they're doing a great thing by putting a few billion back here and there.Vilham wrote:
"Which in a way" is totally not putting it back in unless that company makes a loss.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So...where did I say all money rich people earn goes back into the system?Vilham wrote:
Where did I say it did? All I have said is that suggesting the money rich people earn goes back into your own economy is such a retarded statement.
At any rate, a great deal of it is invested into other companies, which in a way is putting it back.
If you aren't trying to claim the contrary to my original statement why did you reply to my post in the first place, you certainly werent agreeing with it.
You started it.11 Bravo wrote:
without water nothing is important. dont be cute.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Money is nothing without water.11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
Different standards for different countries.ruisleipa wrote:
should they be philanthropic? Yes, I believe they should.Cybargs wrote:
So people who make more than 5 mil should just give their money away and stop working right?
A million dollars is nothing really... When you think about raising kids...
As for raising a kid, I'm 100% sure my folks never spent anywhere near that much specifically on raising their (3) kids. It is certainly enough.
Top of the list.... Work!11 Bravo wrote:
what is more important?Beduin wrote:
no11 Bravo wrote:
money IS everything. anyone who says otherwise is either young and lives at home still sucking off the tit, or grew up with enough money to get a good head start in life.
WHERE DID I SAY THEY SHOULD?! Nice self-facepalm.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Look, I'm just going to call it facepalm and let you think all rich people are carbon copies of Mr. Burns. The government is not going to help the economy by pulling wealth out of it, then pretending they're doing a great thing by putting a few billion back here and there.Vilham wrote:
"Which in a way" is totally not putting it back in unless that company makes a loss.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So...where did I say all money rich people earn goes back into the system?
At any rate, a great deal of it is invested into other companies, which in a way is putting it back.
If you aren't trying to claim the contrary to my original statement why did you reply to my post in the first place, you certainly werent agreeing with it.
Ill say this again for your benefit because you also seem to suffer from not being able to read. The money rich people have does NOT all feed back into the system, stop trying to claim it does, it DOESN'T.Cybargs wrote:
Different standards for different countries.ruisleipa wrote:
should they be philanthropic? Yes, I believe they should.Cybargs wrote:
So people who make more than 5 mil should just give their money away and stop working right?
A million dollars is nothing really... When you think about raising kids...
As for raising a kid, I'm 100% sure my folks never spent anywhere near that much specifically on raising their (3) kids. It is certainly enough.
Vilham: There will be an income disparity NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE. Getting money and support from the state =/= income. Maybe some people should get off their ass and start working. And yes most rich people do invest in successful business', why invest in a failing one? The money they earn belongs to them and they have the right to do whatever they want with it. When a business expands, sure the owner becomes a lot richer, coz shit he took ALL THE RISK when starting the business in the first place. Everyone else would just find another job while he lost his business. Never forget when a company expands, it employs more people, creating more livelihood. Do the rich spend money? Yes. Do the rich pay a lot in taxes? Yes. When people become richer, they indirectly benefit EVERYONE.
Should the rich be philanthropic? I think most rich people are, giving huge funds to educational institutions, sponsoring medical programs, run and donate to charities etc.
Then feel free to send me any amount of money over the upper limit of what you really need. I accept checks.Vilham wrote:
WHERE DID I SAY THEY SHOULD?! Nice self-facepalm.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Look, I'm just going to call it facepalm and let you think all rich people are carbon copies of Mr. Burns. The government is not going to help the economy by pulling wealth out of it, then pretending they're doing a great thing by putting a few billion back here and there.Vilham wrote:
"Which in a way" is totally not putting it back in unless that company makes a loss.
If you aren't trying to claim the contrary to my original statement why did you reply to my post in the first place, you certainly werent agreeing with it.
I am a rich person you moron, I have no problem with the system, I never even said I did either. Im just being realistic.
Seriously learn to fucking read before you try replying to people yeah.
Time to give ol' BF2S a rest for the day, wot? Or are you squirreling away tact along with your rich people war bucks?Vilham wrote:
moron
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-05-01 03:40:33)
Everyone benefits. Sure the motivated rich man would benefit the most. The richer a person is, he/she directly uplifts his/her's local area. The rich still need a mechanic, groceries, transportation, entertainment etc. Sure they would buy stuff of upper quality, but does that not also employ more people? Investment in a sense is trickle down economics. You put money in a company, that company uses that money to employ people.Vilham wrote:
Ill say this again for your benefit because you also seem to suffer from not being able to read. The money rich people have does NOT all feed back into the system, stop trying to claim it does, it DOESN'T.Cybargs wrote:
Different standards for different countries.ruisleipa wrote:
should they be philanthropic? Yes, I believe they should.
As for raising a kid, I'm 100% sure my folks never spent anywhere near that much specifically on raising their (3) kids. It is certainly enough.
Vilham: There will be an income disparity NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE. Getting money and support from the state =/= income. Maybe some people should get off their ass and start working. And yes most rich people do invest in successful business', why invest in a failing one? The money they earn belongs to them and they have the right to do whatever they want with it. When a business expands, sure the owner becomes a lot richer, coz shit he took ALL THE RISK when starting the business in the first place. Everyone else would just find another job while he lost his business. Never forget when a company expands, it employs more people, creating more livelihood. Do the rich spend money? Yes. Do the rich pay a lot in taxes? Yes. When people become richer, they indirectly benefit EVERYONE.
Should the rich be philanthropic? I think most rich people are, giving huge funds to educational institutions, sponsoring medical programs, run and donate to charities etc.
I have no problem with the system, I benefit from it. Where did I say it was a bad system? Im just being realistic as to how it works, you aren't. Because the moment you do your gunna have to accept that you benefit from others suffering.
Seriously people. L2R.
What about patent laws preventing people from doing something they they see useful and some other people would like to see done?Cybargs wrote:
Maybe some people should get off their ass and start working.
So tax money isn't used to fund private business' to expand?Cybargs wrote:
When a business expands, sure the owner becomes a lot richer, coz shit he took ALL THE RISK when starting the business in the first place.
That's nice, but why so many companies pay so low wage for their employees?Cybargs wrote:
Never forget when a company expands, it employs more people, creating more livelihood.
Last edited by BLdw (2010-05-01 03:51:45)
You are what you worth. Hell companies outsourcing cheap labour helped Asia's economical development by a SHITLOAD. They pay low wages because people ACCEPT the low pay. Hell we all benefit from lower prices.BLdw wrote:
What about patent laws preventing people from doing something they they see useful and some other people would like to see done?Cybargs wrote:
Maybe some people should get off their ass and start working.
If someone spent their sweat and blood researching and developing a technology, it is their right to make as much money from it. Or would you like the Chinese system where they just knock off every product?So tax money isn't used to fund private business' to expand?Cybargs wrote:
When a business expands, sure the owner becomes a lot richer, coz shit he took ALL THE RISK when starting the business in the first place.
No it's not. Companies and banks had to pay back the bailout funds with interest. If you're talking about government contracts, that's a complete different case. Hey if you need shit to be built you gotta spend the money. Sure it goes to private business' but they win contracts because they are much much more competitive than local business'. Government corruption and bribes is a completely different matter. You don't know how hard it is to run a company and profit do you?That's nice, why so many companies pay so low wage for their employees?Cybargs wrote:
Never forget when a company expands, it employs more people, creating more livelihood.