It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by Domo1
The way I see it, well, the more money in circulation (OR in banks hoarded by some people even though it's out of circulation) means that our value goes The more these guys make (And they basically make it themselves through inflation) means the less buying power our "regular" dollars has. So how much is too much? When our value starts to drop like a Lead Zeppelin, I'd say that someone is making too much.And what's worse they are not putting it back in circulation it's basically stagnating.
Originally posted by wingsfan
being rich is totally OK, being a billionaire many, many, many times over is a calling to get beheaded.
Originally posted by Domo1
I've seen a lot of complaints about some members in society holding vast amounts of wealth. I certainly understand why people feel frustrated. It IS frustrating to know that some people can wipe with $100 bills and some people can't afford to feed their families. My question, as the title implies; how much is too much? Should there be a limit? Should the wealthy (and I'm going to say someone with more than 5 million dollars) be required to pay more tax than they do already?
Someone in another thread something that I liked, 'How much do they really need at that point (referring to Walmart estate beneficiaries) it's seems like it's just to show off after awhile!' That's what really sparked this tread. I don't really need half the things I own. I'm not a millionaire, but live very comfortably. Since I don't technically need my assets, and could theoretically survive working at McDonalds, should I just give everything away? I don't mean that to sound snarky, it's just an example.
There is obviously a problem in this country, but do you feel that the rich deserve to keep the money they have made, and do you believe there should be a limit on personal assets? If so, what should be done with those assets? How would you redistribute them fairly?
What would you do to close the wealth gap. I do readily agree this is a problem, and not just a 'they're lazy' issue.
Originally posted by Domo1How Much $ Is Too Much For One Person To Have?
In 2006, the "real" (adjusted for inflation) median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau. The real median earnings of men who worked full time, year-round climbed between 2006 and 2007, from $43,460 to $45,113 (about 3.6 time minimum wage in 2006 to 3.7 time minimum wage in 2007). For women, the corresponding increase was from $33,437 to $35,102 (2.8 and 2.9 times minimum wage respectively). The median income per household member (including all working and non-working members above the age of 14) was $26,036 in 2006. In 2006, there were approximately 116,011,000 households in the United States. 1.93% of all households had annual incomes exceeding $250,000. 12.3% fell below the federal poverty threshold and the bottom 20% earned less than $19,178. The aggregate income distribution is highly concentrated towards the top, with the top 6.37% earning roughly one third of all income, and those with upper-middle incomes controlling a large, though declining, share of the total earned income. Income inequality in the United States, which had decreased slowly after World War II until 1970, began to increase in the 1970s until reaching a peak in 2006. It declined a little in 2007. Households in the top quintile (i.e., top 20%), 77% of which had two or more income earners, had incomes exceeding $91,705. Households in the mid quintile, with a mean of approximately one income earner per household had incomes between $36,000 and $57,657. Households in the lowest quintile had incomes less than $19,178 and the majority had no income earner.