/dev/null Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Are trust fund babies the ward of the state, or just parasites living off their ancestors' wealth? Why do you have a problem with private property? Most LiberalsProgressives that I know only have have one major problem with private property...when somebody else has more of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Property rights only exist because of the state. State collapses so would the "rights". You act as if they're some kind of fixed divine right. Theyre open to discussion and interpretation. Its the state that both creates and supports them. From the states perspective it can't tolerate growing bases of free riders on either end of the economic spectrum. Realizing the fruits of society's labor should be based on merit, not birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Property rights only exist because of the state. State collapses so would the "rights". You act as if they're some kind of fixed divine right. Theyre open to discussion and interpretation. Its the state that both creates and supports them. From the states perspective it can't tolerate growing bases of free riders on either end of the economic spectrum. Realizing the fruits of society's labor should be based on merit, not birth. Thanks for the diktat, Karl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Property rights only exist because of the state. State collapses so would the "rights". You act as if they're some kind of fixed divine right. Theyre open to discussion and interpretation. Its the state that both creates and supports them. From the states perspective it can't tolerate growing bases of free riders on either end of the economic spectrum. Realizing the fruits of society's labor should be based on merit, not birth. So I'm allowed to enjoy the fruits of my labor, just so long as I don't use them to help my own kids?? . Are trust fund babies the ward of the state, or just parasites living off their ancestors' wealth? Why do you have a problem with private property? Mostly because no one left him a trust fund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Help them as much as you want. Give them great educations and world experiences so they can contribute to society. Its the unmotivated free loaders that are a drag on the rest of us and undeserving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 You must if you want to be on the side of carrying the load for others who aren't contributing You don't have a clue do you. So all wealthy people pass on their estate to "trust fund babies" that just live off and abuse the assets? Wrong! Many are children who want to carry on the family business but find they can't because they have no way to give the government half of the business. They have to sell it to pay the tax. Good job government. Sure they could have done some estate planning to mitigate the tax but it doesn't work for everyone. The Paris Hiltons of the world are a very small minority. But if her grandfather wanted to leave her a brazillion dollars what business is it to the government. Oh and trust me, she'a contributing big time to the US economy. Help them as much as you want. Give them great educations and world experiences so they can contribute to society. Its the unmotivated free loaders that are a drag on the rest of us and undeserving. So we "punish" the majority (and it's a BIG majority) because of a few "freeloaders"? Yeah, great plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) Thanks for the diktat, Karl. You have no idea what I said. Thats the problem with the faux news sarcasm sound bite school of debate. Lose their ability to think, eveything goes over their head. Marx would have been totally opposed to individual merit to determine wealth distribution. Edited July 11, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Help them as much as you want. Give them great educations and world experiences so they can contribute to society. Its the unmotivated free loaders that are a drag on the rest of us and undeserving. There are a lot more "poor" freeloaders who are a drag on society than a few of the silver spoon kids. All the welfare, medicaide, union only allowed, state, fedeeral and local jobs that are pretty much a guarentee for lfe, with huge retirement benefits are much more of a drain on society. How's about cutting out the freebies and see how soon the boarder problem dries up. Or how quickly people want to dig ditches if they starve to death but find it beneath themselves to flip burgers or shovel **** on a farm, they'd rather collect foodstamps and free money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Holy ****, where does the Government get the notion that taking a family members hard earned money that has already been taxed, taxing it again and screwing the heirs is "Fair"??? Why is there any tax on inheritances at all?? ! To be fair sometimes a good portion of these very large estates have not been taxed due to cost basis step ups to the heirs. A compromise would be to do away with the estate tax and then do away with the step up for very large estates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Property rights only exist because of the state. State collapses so would the "rights". You act as if they're some kind of fixed divine right. Theyre open to discussion and interpretation. Its the state that both creates and supports them. From the states perspective it can't tolerate growing bases of free riders on either end of the economic spectrum. Realizing the fruits of society's labor should be based on merit, not birth. Well, that's mostly retarded. I only own my car because the state grants me the right of ownership? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Well I know if Joe where in charge there would be no need to be concerned about estate tax. Just take dad's place on the collective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Help them as much as you want. Give them great educations and world experiences so they can contribute to society. Its the unmotivated free loaders that are a drag on the rest of us and undeserving. What 'unmotivated freeloaders' are you talking about? Care to provide some examples and some statistics about how many of these 'unmotivated freeloaders' exist and how they are impacting the 'rest of us'? Right now you are just flailing your arms and running in circles on this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 You have no idea what I said. Thats the problem with the faux news sarcasm sound bite school of debate. Lose their ability to think, eveything goes over their head. Marx would have been totally opposed to individual merit to determine wealth distribution. Which is what you wrote. How do you allocate "fruits of society's labor" on merit? Do you set up a government program that funnels cash to people who earn all A's in high school? Or do you let people (capitalists) determine how they want to funnel their own cash, be it to family members or others who have a higher propensity to earn a return on that invested capital? It's private wealth, and it's up to the owner of that wealth to decide the best place for it. And yes, the state decides the status of the private wealth, and correct me if I'm wrong, this republic was founded on the unbending ideal of individual liberty, which includes wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Truth be told there are a lot of free rider do-nothing trust fund babies who are totally undeserving. I have no problem imposing an 100% tax on them unless they can demonstrate theyre making a positive contribution to society in some way. Like having served in the military. Byconsuming and not producing they're every bit the drag on the rest of us the welfare people they're always busting on That's almost 3rdlng level stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 That's almost 3rdlng level stupid. Joe six pack is on his own level of stupid. Comparing him to 3rd is unfair to 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Byconsuming and not producing they're every bit the drag on the rest of us the welfare people they're always busting on So consumption does nothing for the economy? WTF dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) Yo doood. Think of an example of 2 cavemen living together in same cave: 1. Both caveman hunt for 8 hours a day and feed themselves 2. One caveman is a lazy f#&% and doesn't hunt. The other doesn't object and must hunt 16 hours a day to feed the 2 of them Edited July 11, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjamie12 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffaloo consumption does nothing for the economy? WTF dude. Yo doood. Think of an example of 2 cavemen living together in same cave: 1. Both caveman hunt for 8 hours a day and feed themselves 2. One caveman is a lazy f#&% and doesn't hunt. The other doesn't object and must hunt 16 hours a day to feed the 2 of them Except #2 doesn't have to hunt 16 hours a day to feed the 2 of them. He hunts 8 hours a day to feed himself. The other guy's dad died years ago and gave him a liftime supply of food. You don't even understand your own arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Joe six pack is on his own level of stupid. Comparing him to 3rd is unfair to 3rd. Thanks. RI is one of those kind of guys that don't contribute anything more than hissy fits full of indignation over the slightest hint that someone doesn't agree with him. He also likes to pick fights, evidenced by his most recent post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) @jj you just made a boatload of wild ass assumptions without even realizing. For starters you assume that past production = future production. 2 that all money "earned" was done so productively. 3 that there's no inflation. Edited July 11, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts