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 TheRedneck
reply to post by Germanicus
I considered your OP to be poor propaganda and to be honest,infantile.
I am sorry to hear that.
My purpose in presenting this thread was to show how far some will go to redistribute wealth, and make no mistake, right or wrong, that is what we are discussing here. My opinion following the story is based on what I know of history, both from textbooks and from personal experience (I am an old guy), and from my lifetime of observations on human behavior.
I have observed in that lifetime that humans act in their own self-interest, and moreso when they are impoverished. This does not prohibit acts of kindness, however, since those themselves can be seen as in self-interest when they give the donor a feeling of pleasure. Some receive more pleasure from helping others than others do, and the degree of aid to others always rises in proportion to the individual feeling of personal sufficiency.
Without that dynamic, your plans might be considerably more realistic; you choose however to ignore them. So be it. It is interesting that although you claim you have 'won' the debate (when in actuality is those who read our retorts who have the honor of making that decision), yet resort to phrases such as 'infantile'.
Good luck with your plans of world domination. I have a feeling you may need all of it you can get.
Jobs will alter to mirror machines with an efficiency and touch ratio measured against milliseconds as we've seen inside larger hubs. Say I drink green tea and urinate more frequently. How about I save myself a firing, and start with a... Hell no.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Bluesma
Actually, it is about France, but also about the attitude that allows such a proposition to be accepted. We have tended to focus on American politics, I'm afraid, but I am very interested in how this will affect France.
Originally posted by Ghost375
370k cap? That seems a little low.
10 million would be a pretty fair cap.
There's not a single damn reason why anyone needs multiple porsches, multiple mansions, and much more.
And there's not a single damn person who did so much work that he actually deserves those things.
Originally posted by MaryStillToe
While I think that $370,000 is way too low, I agree with the concept that Jean-Luc Mélenchon is proposing.
Healthy and well-balanced communities require a high degree of proudctivity, both collectively and individually. If certain individuals are "sitting on" excess wealth, then those resources are not being used productively and are simply going to waste.
The cap would force the wealthy to become productive members of the societies they live in and benefit from. They would choose between using their excess resources constructively or having it taken away.
- All excess wealth would be invested, given to charitable organizations, or used to compensate employees.
- Reduces the incentives and vehicles that enable greed and hoarding of resources.
I do think that an annual cap of $2,000,000 for individuals and up to $3,000,000 for people with children or dependents would be more than fair.
Invest, Employ, or Lose It.
Originally posted by Xeven
I have lineral views most of the time. The rediculas thing about these tax hikes on the rich are they don't get money to the working poor they just get more money to the government... Without cuts and laws to improve paying people who work a decent wage all these tax hikes do is give the government more money to waste.