It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One person should only be so rich.

page: 1
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+29 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   
I believe that there should be a limit on how much wealth one person could have: this would solve some of the worlds problems, it would mean too much power could not be in the hands of one person, help to solve inequality, and increase social mobility, less wealth at the very top would only be a good thing. Although this would be difficult to enforce I think it would be a good thing for the world. How about a maximum wealth of 100 million pounds worldwide for any individual?



+12 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


Rather like communism then?


+18 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by s12345
 


Rather like communism then?


Ooh, sooo scary. A poster from the fifties informed me of communism. I thrive on wartime propaganda y'know.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
since 99% of us will never reach that limit, it couldn't hurt.

and since politicians represent the people, and who wouldn't want extra cash in their pocket, it should pass the house and the senate with record votes never seen in american history.

oh wait, the senate and the house currently represent 1% of the population. my bad, this idea might get you targeted by a predator drone.


edit on 24-12-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)


+24 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:48 AM
link   
To me, Communism is the way of the future.

According to this site, Ignorance is frowned upon, but it is the prehistoric-like fear of Communism that, to me, is a blatant red-flag that people do not understand the true miracle that Communism could be for the World.

The biggest secret of economics is that Communism is a very powerful system.




Of course, in a sick and perverted system such as Imperialism, it is called, basically, The Devil.







Get educated and elect people who aren't in it for the money.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   
In theory, I would agree.

In practice, if you give the government the power to limit the amount of money a person is able to earn ("legally"), than that's a huge violation of Civil Rights, is unconstitutional, and would lead to a slippery slope.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:01 AM
link   
To quote Jean-Luc Picard, 'but we don't have money as you know it, we do things for the better good of humanity.....'

Wow, Star Trek was Communistic......I have lost all faith in the system.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   
I think it would be best if done over the whole world: the wealth limit. Also I see it as capitalism with a ceiling. Business would go on except that at a certain point it would be best to spend the money, give it away, because of the ceiling. This would help spread wealth around, create more and better paid jobs. I think it would soon become clear that most of the worlds problems would disappear. It would also squash the prices of things down: in a world when no one can have more than 100 million, paintings by old masters, yachts would decline in price and with them everything else. I heard somewhere that differences between the best paid and the worst cause a lot of illness, a ceiling on wealth would make people healthier. We already found out with the banking collapse that putting large amounts of wealth in a few places causes great economic instability. Also once people get to a certain point then keeping wealth would be a higher priority: this may have prevented the banking collapse.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Not really sure how this is supposed to work.

I start company and after 10 years have saved 100 million lbs. so what am I to do with my company now? I am certainly not going to keep running it for FREE and I cannot sell it because I would be going over the 100 million lbs I am allowed to own.

So please inform me what is to happen to this company? (Shut it down and lay off all my employees?)

edit on 24-12-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Adamanteus
 


Why can you not run it for free. You don't need any more money you have your 100mil ... ??

your still allowed to pay your employees...

You could do a lot with those spare profits.....

I Personally Can not see your point?


edit on 24-12-2011 by nawki because: Add more



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by nawki
reply to post by Adamanteus
 


Why can you not run it for free. You don't need any more money you 100mil ... ??

Can't see your point?



Why would I want to? If I had all the money I could ever own I'd be flying around the world spending it instead of working for nothing.

If You won the lottery for 100 million tomorrow would You continue to go to work and tell the boss to keep Your salary because you had enough money?



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unrealised
To me, Communism is the way of the future.

According to this site, Ignorance is frowned upon, but it is the prehistoric-like fear of Communism that, to me, is a blatant red-flag that people do not understand the true miracle that Communism could be for the World.

The biggest secret of economics is that Communism is a very powerful system.




Of course, in a sick and perverted system such as Imperialism, it is called, basically, The Devil.







Get educated and elect people who aren't in it for the money.


I know!! I can't WAIT to stand in line for toilet paper!

Wave of the future. Yeah.

OP, why do you care how much a person has? Besides jealously, of course.

/TOA



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Adamanteus

Originally posted by nawki
reply to post by Adamanteus
 


Why can you not run it for free. You don't need any more money you 100mil ... ??

Can't see your point?



Why would I want to? If I had all the money I could ever own I'd be flying around the world spending it instead of working for nothing.

If You won the lottery for 100 million tomorrow would You continue to go to work and tell the boss to keep Your salary because you had enough money?


Why do you have to keep working?? I thought this was about whether the company would continue to operate.

You make 100mil running your company.. Your always got 100mil because the company continues in your absence, your workers keep working... you do what ever the hell you want. holidays.. parties whatever you like.....you pay your employees great wages... give em great benefits......

I dunno.. still not sure.. i see what you mean..?.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by s12345
 


Rather like communism then?

Not in the slightest.....



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by nawki

Originally posted by Adamanteus

Originally posted by nawki
reply to post by Adamanteus
 


Why can you not run it for free. You don't need any more money you 100mil ... ??

Can't see your point?



Why would I want to? If I had all the money I could ever own I'd be flying around the world spending it instead of working for nothing.

If You won the lottery for 100 million tomorrow would You continue to go to work and tell the boss to keep Your salary because you had enough money?


Why do you have to keep working?? I thought this was about whether the company would continue to operate.

You make 100mil running your company.. Your always got 100mil because the company continues in your absence, your workers keep working... you do what ever the hell you want. holidays.. parties whatever you like.....you pay your employees great wages... give em great benefits......

I dunno.. still not sure.. i see what you mean..?.


That is not how it will work, IF I were forced to give away my 10 million in profits a year it would not go to workers, charity etc.. first and foremost I would spend as much as possible on frivolous things(personal bum wiper anyone?) and if there were anything left it would go to my immediate family daughters,parents/,grandparents then cousins,2nd cousins etc.. This is how the elite think and all the money would still be in the controlling families that it is currently.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Is money really wealth?
Answer me this- whats more wealthier, A Thriving World or a king iin a castle


+7 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


Hmm let's put your theory into another perspective, a hypothetical if you will...

You are an Olympic runner and are in the top 1%, you got to that 1% by training non stop every day since you can remember, you've sacrificed a lot to get where you are, to be the best you can be.

Now, someone decides that things need to be "fairer" for everyone, so a cap is put in place and you are not allowed to run faster than this cap.

You've sacrificed many things and spent a lifetime to be the best and now you're being told you can't go out there and be the best you can be because it's not "fair"

Does that sound right?

Would it be right to tell Usain Bolt that he can't go out and run under 10 seconds?

This is exactly what you are proposing by capping peoples wealth.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
I disagree strongly. Wealthy people are essential for the economy. They have money to burn on promising investments and expensive (read: advanced) stuff. Private capital, just as public capital, plays a very important role in pushing humanity forward.
edit on 24/12/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Yeah... I don't know.

In the context of rich people being rich because they got there by less than honest means, sure it sounds like a great idea.

However, there are a bunch of other rich people out there who became rich by honest, hard work... and I don't think that's very fair to them.

I think the bigger issue at hand is the difficulty of starting a small business. But then you have to think about how if you do manage to start a small business, and come up with a great product, it usually ends up getting bought out by a larger corporation. I think THAT'S where the problem lies. Multi-billion dollar corporations gaining monopolies on industries. I think if you can curb that, then you curb the concentration of wealth in a small area. However, I wouldn't know how to go about doing that, or if that would even be Constitutional. (You can't really tell people that they CANNOT sell their own business, etc etc)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by s12345
 


Rather like communism then?


Communism works great on paper, not so much in reality. The problem is theres always that asshole in the government who wants more than his fair share.

The first century christians practiced a type of communal living where they went and sold off their properties and then distributed the money equally amoung eachother and they actually lived in their church/place of worship and God's house was really God's house because they lived there and he lived in them.

It could work if everyone was of one mind and in accordance with one another. Capitalists want to make you think socialism is fail because they don't want to lose their money and power but it can work if you do it right and through God.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join