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: 18
32
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by s12345
 


Completely DISAGREE with you...communist statement, lets also limit the amount of births world wide, the maximum ago you can live to...say 80 then your useless and should be put down....etc.etc...

Sniper out...




posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


I take it you don't go to the racetrack?

You aren't aware that racehorses are handicapped by adding weights to even the field and make it sporting?

But even so, it is still a poor analogy.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


IAMIAM,

I respect your view points and beliefs. Just because the Masonic Order rejected you does not mean that you are not worthy of respect as a man with beliefs. I respect a person who is forthright and honest. Nice to meet people like yourself with those personable qualities.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


What incentive could there possibly be with a $1 billion cap on wealth?

I guess I'll just stay in bed the rest of my life.

Do you have any conception of how ridiculous that argument is?

Pretty sure a cap on wealth wouldn't have stopped any of those things you mentioned from reaching fruition, as the people involved were motivated by other things than wealth accumulation.

Only wealth addicts would see it as de-motivating, and that's perhaps a good thing.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAMIAM
My issue is with false Idols.

I will judge them.

I will smash them.

And I will make all things new...

...With Love,

Your Brother


You sound a bit scary. Still, everyone is a tough guy on the Internet.

I don't condemn people for generating wealth.

I presume you have a job? That wealth comes from either an entrepreneur employing you or a government job in which that entrepreneur's wealth has been taxed to give you a job.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
You sound a bit scary. Still, everyone is a tough guy on the Internet.


Tough guy? In a sense, but toughness is not my weapon of choice.

I prefer simply speaking the truth. My weapons are logic, reason, and rhetoric.


Originally posted by ollncasino
I don't condemn people for generating wealth.


Again, I condemn no man. I go after the idols they worship. I will take on their false God's.


Originally posted by ollncasino
I presume you have a job? That wealth comes from either an entrepreneur employing you or a government job in which that entrepreneur's wealth has been taxed to give you a job.


I suppose as many times as I get asked this, that I would need to put a disclaimer by now...

No, I do not work.

I help friends who need it.

My pay is distributed to me by my employer, look up, WAY UP!

Please do not ask me to elaborate. You can find postings in the past which detail how I get by while doing what I do in this world.

With Love,

Your Brother
edit on 25-12-2011 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


What? I said you cannot, I didn't say you would not.

It is wrong in every sense.

If you disagree, you are anti-freedom.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
You cannot steal a free man's wealth, you cannot impose your will on him. UNLESS he voluntarily allows it.


A FREE Man does not have wealth in the earth, but stores his treasure in heaven, the memories of future generations.

When a man acquires the belief that he owns a thing he becomes a slave to that thing.

To support his belief in ownership, he will have to defend with violence that thing.

If he is too weak, he will need to have help.

Help doesn't come free.

He is now a slave to his thing AND the government he put together to support his false belief in ownership.

As the government grows it will demand ever more servitude to protecting these things.



The world is full of snares and traps. Do not fall for them.

Freedom is too precious to be a slave to ANY thing.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Me ? Anti-freedom? Hardly.

But every family man is a pragmatist. He cannot make choices that directly and immediately endanger the welfare of his family.

We see it every day in the US, as most submit to the slow erosion of their freedom because they have no other choice, no viable option to halt it.

OWS is an attempt, and look at the scorn heaped upon it for even trying: "get a job (knuckle under, dammit, and quit rocking the boat), you lazy hippie scum."

Eventually it will reach a point that it will no longer make a difference whether one submits or not, the family is equally threatened, and at that point violent revolt will occur, because there will be nothing left to lose but one's life, and that will be worthless without change.

People have no idea how close we are to the breaking point.

I hear the cracking every day, and it grows louder by the week.

There is, at the very most, about four to six months left, after which things will spin down into violent chaos in most parts of the world, including the US.

I fear the US is doomed already beyond retrieval. Many of us have been trying to stave off the end for the last few years, but the elites are deaf and heedless, they live in denial of the realities they have created, and believe that the masses will remain easily controlled through fear and intimidation.

That only works for so long.

Time is soon up.

Change must, must, be implemented very soon to avoid global social disaster. Capping wealth is the quickest and most fair and efficient way to achieve it. A wealth cap as I've suggested, $1 billion, would free enough money to restart the global economy and create millions of new jobs, without actually depriving the wealthy of a single iota of anything real, save destructive power. They would still have their yachts, mistresses, and all their other toys.

Everyone else would have adequate food, shelter, and healthcare.

What the hell is wrong with that outcome, compared to the alternative?

Only a sociopath could possibly disagree.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by cuervo
Name anybody who has gotten their billions of dollars through "hard and honest work". No one person can attain that wealth without victims.
edit on 24-12-2011 by cuervo because: Clarifying.


Why not? Richard Branson is a self made billionaire. And funding space tourism.

www.virgingalactic.com...



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


Your post is completely irrelevant to mine.

It is unlawful to steal a free man's wealth against his will, it is against the rule of law. PERIOD.

No matter how much you talk about OWS or socialism it will never change that fact.

If you are against a man's freedom to volunteer his good will then you are surely against freedom.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 

So you think that if they had their way, they would just stop with capping the limits on wealth? And there is the question on what is defined as wealth, and where would it stop? For as long as there has been recorded history, there has always been jealousy between people, those that have and those that have not. Funny how those that have, most started out like everyone else but worked hard to find the one thing that would enable them to exceed far beyond what would be considered their station. Not every one is good with money, and those that are, tend to accumulate it very well, being successful. But here again, where would it stop where it no longer is something to do or to try for? What is to stop those that are enforcing the rules from they themselves violating said rules? The very notion of such reeks of communism, under its purest form. You see, when Marx wrote in his philosophy, every one was equal and no one would have more than the other. While this may seem like a good idea, it is a trap unto itself.
Under that kind of society, you would have that 1 billion dollars, until there was more people who did not have such and would be forced to give up your wealth to support someone else. That sounds so much like the dictatorships from the by gone era, where those who had the wealth were often killed and hunted down, their property stolen and then given to those who did not rightfully earn such. Is this what we really want?

If you want more examples of such, try looking at the USSR under say Stalin, or even better, lets look at China from the time of Mao to just before Hong Kong was returned to China.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by s12345
 


Rather like communism then?



Most of the western world has a minimum wage. It makes logical sense that there should be a maximum wage too. Nothing to do with communism..

Maybe people should get over the communism/ capitalism thing... Both are failed systems..



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Are you citing the example of modern American capitalism as a failed example?

If you are, you're not citing true capitalism.

You're citing fascism.

So in essence your argument is fascism and communism are failed systems.

I would even go as far as arguing that communism can be done right but only on a voluntary basis. You can't force somebody into communism.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


Sure you have a point there but when I said wealth, I meant anything a free man earns or creates out of his living energy and efforts.

Say a man earns apples for his work on fixing the neighbors swing set. Are you saying the man is a slave to the apple?

No, he absolutely isn't. Is he a slave to the owner of the swing set? No, they made a contract to trade energy/effort for apples.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 





Are you citing the example of modern American capitalism as a failed example? If you are, you're not citing true capitalism. You're citing fascism.


If you think that is fascism you do not have a clue what you are talking about...

How can you have infinite growth on a planet with finite resources... The Chinese seem to be able to grasp this simple concept that some how seems to elude the average American..



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Sure you have a point there but when I said wealth, I meant anything a free man earns or creates out of his living energy and efforts.

Say a man earns apples for his work on fixing the neighbors swing set. Are you saying the man is a slave to the apple?

No, he absolutely isn't. Is he a slave to the owner of the swing set? No, they made a contract to trade energy/effort for apples.


Man should not make contracts for it shows motive to profit off of another.

Rather, the man should fix the swing set because it needs fixing and he is capable, and the other man should give the apples because they are needed by the first.

Expectation of a return for good deeds, does not make a good deed, but a selfish one.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by wardk28
First off, as long as your money is gotten honestly, I don't have a problem with how much money someone has. I don't like the idea of someone else deciding how much money is too much. I'm all about everyone going out and getting their own and having their deluxe apartment on the east side. The problem is that in today's society, ripping people off has become common place. This will make capitalism appear evil. Communism looks great on paper but human nature takes over and you have what we see in China and in Soviet Russia. I much rather people decide how much money another makes through free enterprise then the government setting the rules on how much everyone makes. If we can get back to the early 20th century, and the way capitalism was suppose to work, we could have a prosperous society. Look at how much was invented in a free society. There was incentive to go out and work hard. If you are only allow to make so much, what incentive would you have spending 12 years in school to be a doctor when you can go cut lawns and make the same amount?


And there you have the heart of the argument. Incentive. Without incentive you do not perceive a reason to excel, but this is a false truth. It's selfishness at its utmost. The problem with motivation is not a monetary one, rather its your own lack of imagination in how a communal system might empower the harder working. I personally think that in a communist ssystem, the harder working / industrious individual is rewarded with a position of power tantamount to leadership within his own organization, as obviously he is more intellectually apt to provide profound leadership for his fellows.

Again, the answer is not monetary reward, it has to be something more personal and empowering than mere financial gain. Respect has to stop being given to those with more money, and instead given to those who are proven to be capable. Money is a false equal to capability. We all have to recognize this in order to advance.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


Again with the jealousy crap?

No one is jealous...they just want a fair shake and a decent life, one that allows them to [earn enough to support themselves and their families without the constant grinding fear of going homeless and hungry.

It is the wealthy who are the jealous ones, just like the guy with the trophy wife who he knows is too hot for him, and thinks every single other guy wants to take her away. That's what jealousy is about: insecurity.

The wealthy know they haven't really earned what they have and don't deserve it, and therefore jealously guard it.

Excessive wealth building is a mental disorder stemming from insecurity or power issues, not something to be proud of.

Please note the use of the excessive modifier to wealth building. It is fine if you know when to quit, say after you've accumulated enough to see to your needs, your children's, and perhaps theirs, although by that point you aren't leaving them much incentive to work, are you?



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


Man doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to.

In a perfect world, sure, people can be nice enough to WANT to help others, I wouldn't mind fixing the neighbor's swing set but I'm not going to be on call every time his swing set breaks.

A man's word is a man's bond.




top topics



 
32
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join