The 99% Halloween.

Sometimes, we have to get back to basics to see our way through a complicated problem. I ran across a short video dealing with children, Halloween, and candy. What happens when kids meet "fair share?"
dailycaller.com...


In order not to understand this, one must have listened to far too many politicians or professors (or both). "Out of the mouths of babes."

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


hysterical video and I do agree but where are the parents during all this? If I saw this happening to my kid I would have been all over this guy.

reply to post by shadwgirl

Dear shadwgirl,

Good point, me too, maybe they were steered away by a producer. But you raise a good point. Who is there to come between us and redistribution? Sadly, we have to fight these battles on our own. I hope those kids don't forget and lose their sense of right and wrong. (or, their passion for defending themselves.)

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


you understand that a kid in one neighborhood may get many times the amount of candy (in quality and volume) than a kid in another neighborhood only a few miles away and not because one of them simply worked harder for that candy but because of the demographics of those neighborhoods

so one kid through no fault of his own is getting the short end of the stick

and now you see why this is a horrible example
(there are other reasons as well like the fact that our economy doesnt run on candy and that just because one kid has less doesnt mean the economy is going to stall because they dont have enough candy to buy things from the kid hoarding a mountain of it)

I agree and I hope you are right about the young ones remembering this. Wealth redistribution is becoming a big issue in this country and I don't agree with it. I hope it doesn't come down to it but this could be an issue that can start a civil war. I keep hoping every day that people realize that they need to earn what they want instead of taking it from someone who already has it.

reply to post by charles1952


LOL - great video Charles and it does push home a very good point.

Now, to make things fair - where was the kid with the 4978 trucks full of candy that he refused to share "because he worked hard for it" - the same kid that owns "Cadbury" and "Pepsi-Cola".

We can surely agree that money and candy are 2 different animals when discussing this point.

We both know candy does not buy food, clothing, warmth, shelter of any other necessity - only money does that.

Substitute the candy for Lego, X-box games of any other kids "possession" and they will react the same way.

Redistribution of "Massive" (read 100's of Billions of $$$ with a B) wealth should be considered so this stops..........



Because the vast majority of those that have it most certainly did not work hard for it - unless "working hard" is code for exploiting the many for the benefit of the few.

And I am not talking about the average Joe who happens to earn a good wage either - I am talking about the mega wealthy of this planet whom and owned and controlled money for a very very long time - those are the target of this point I am making

reply to post by sirhumperdink

Dear sirhumperdink,

Thank you for a thought provoking post.

a kid in one neighborhood may get many times the amount of candy (in quality and volume) than a kid in another neighborhood . . . not because one of them simply worked harder for that candy but because of the demographics of those neighborhoods

You're absolutely right. Kid "A" put his effort into an area that ended up paying off well, Kid "B" was in an area that didn't pay off so well. Isn't that what life is like? Someone may have been born with a deformity; no modelling career for him, no matter how hard he works. For various reasons, people who work just as hard, don't get the same results.

so one kid through no fault of his own is getting the short end of the stick

That's true. Are you suggesting that everyone should get the niddle end (middle end?) of the stick? To do that, you have to redistribute, don't you? That's not fair, the kids will tell you that.

and now you see why this is a horrible example

Not yet. Many things in this world happen by chance. I'm beginning to think that most things do (but not all). I've never gotten the long end of the lottery stick, through no fault of my own, but others have.

(there are other reasons as well like the fact that our economy doesnt run on candy and that just because one kid has less doesnt mean the economy is going to stall because they dont have enough candy to buy things from the kid hoarding a mountain of it)

True. But does that invalidate the principle? Besides the fairly obvious fact that candy isn't money, how does the principle differ? Besides, I remember receiving money in my trick or treat bag for several years because people were afraid of poisoned candy. Should I have shared that?

Good post, thanks.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by Sublimecraft
reply to post by charles1952

 

LOL - great video Charles and it does push home a very good point.

Now, to make things fair - where was the kid with the 4978 trucks full of candy that he refused to share "because he worked hard for it" - the same kid that owns "Cadbury" and "Pepsi-Cola".

We can surely agree that money and candy are 2 different animals when discussing this point.

We both know candy does not buy food, clothing, warmth, shelter of any other necessity - only money does that.

Substitute the candy for Lego, X-box games of any other kids "possession" and they will react the same way.

Redistribution of "Massive" (read 100's of Billions of $$$ with a B) wealth should be considered so this stops..........

Because the vast majority of those that have it most certainly did not work hard for it - unless "working hard" is code for exploiting the many for the benefit of the few.

And I am not talking about the average Joe who happens to earn a good wage either - I am talking about the mega wealthy of this planet whom and owned and controlled money for a very very long time - those are the target of this point I am making

edit on 30-10-2012 by Sublimecraft because: added last comment

That image absolutely makes my heart sink.

Makes me want to give that buzzard a leg drop from the top rope.

reply to post by Sublimecraft

Great posts tonight! I'm really thankful that we can talk about this. You are all making this a worthwhile thread, thanks.

Dear Sublimecraft,

Excellent work, and I think you're pointing out an avenue of approach.

We can surely agree that money and candy are 2 different animals when discussing this point.

Maybe I can agree with you. I've seen kids hold on to a candy bar with a grim determination that would shame any Wall St. banker. For the kids, it seems, every piece is golden.

Because the vast majority of those that have it most certainly did not work hard for it - unless "working hard" is code for exploiting the many for the benefit of the few.

I'm having trouble following here. Any one who makes money in an illegal manner should have it all confiscated. Perhaps we need laws making additional activities illegal? But what principle can we apply that allows us to take money from a person working behind a desk, and not someone who makes it on a concert stage, baseball diamond, or catwalk?

But that leads us to what I think is your main point. If I understand correctly you want to redistribute from those who have a lot in a developed country, to people who need it, wherever they may be. I have several little bumps in the road that are preventing me from following you too closely.

1.) The government will decide how much to take and from whom. You may be talking about those with hundreds of billions of dollars. Interestingly enough, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet combined are worth $112 Billion and they're the two richest Americans. By the time you get down to number 100 on the list of richest Americans, you're under $4 billion. And only the richest 10 Americans have wealth (not income) of $25 billion or more. I'm assuming in all of this that you're interested in taking their property in various forms, not so much their income. Assume you take all of the wealth and property from all of the richest 400, that will provide you with enough money to cover the federal deficit for one year. Then what?

2.) Everyone knows there will always be starving children, or elderly needing care, or disaster emergencies, or something. The government has no trouble figuring out how to spend more than it takes in. I see no reason why the government, under a redistribution scenario, shouldn't just confiscate everything and give people what it thinks they need.

3.) If you know your "candy" will be taken from you, why bother going out to buy a costume and freeze your little tutu off if you know you're going to have to give nearly all of it away? Why not just hit a couple of houses and go home?

Thanks for the post. I'm learning a lot.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


theres the simple fact that if money is not circulating in the economy it is going to fail
so if people are hoarding money not reinvesting it they are actively harming the economy and that money should be taxed extremely heavily to ensure that there is enough money in the economy to keep it running without having to print more and devalue the currency
(and if you print more in these circumstances it gives enormous power to those who horded because when they spend they will get the full value of that money as it is entering the economy but once it is in the value will have dropped due to the higher amount now in circulation this also allows you to buy labor and goods at the decreased rates and this influx of money will revitalize the economy and allow you to hoard your money and repeat the whole process over)

completely disregarding what is fair and what is not you can still make it an issue of what is actually going to function to keep the country running properly and the country is not running properly when people cant find jobs because some jackal is trying to hoard away every penny to increase their leverage in dealings for labor or assets

we can talk about fair some other time because really thats a secondary issue and very subjective

Why can't these people do what they want with their money? If they want to hoard it, why can't they, it is theirs to begin with. Also, do you really want the government to decide how to distribute it? They ruin almost everything they touch. I really don't understand this distribution idea. What is that saying.......give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach him to fish and he will eat every day or something like that.

reply to post by shadwgirl


its an issue of some people deciding to over fish to such a degree that no matter how bad you want to fish or how good you are at fishing chances are youre not going to pull one up and are forced to get fish from the people who over fished under any insane terms they decide upon

this is why there are regulations on fishing (part of the reason anyway) so that everybody at least has the opportunity to fish

The problem is, half the time, the "1%" doesn't "earn" their "candy". It's stolen from tax payers.

Originally posted by LeoStarchild


Makes me want to give that buzzard a leg drop from the top rope.

It's not a buzzard it's a vulture.

Stupid video making a straw-man argument if I've ever seen one.

Having candy doesn't feed you or your family, put gas in the car or heat your home. Asking a child about his or her definition of fair is beyond ridiculous.

Now if one child had promised each child at that event 1 piece of candy for every 50 pieces of candy bought to him and then had been asked the same question about fair distribution it would have had the opposite (and more realistic) effect.

A nice video that proves the opposite point than it was trying to make.

Kids getting candy from an entitlement program.

Everybody gets something BUT some can play the system more than others so get more.

The ones with more think they deserve more even though they did nothing for it.

A good analogy of corporate greed.

On a side note. How lazy are those kids parents? Parking in a circle to hand out candy instead of walking their neighbourhoods.

How about the big fat kid that eats all the cake and doesn't share while the other kids watch. He may have bought the cake but how much cake can he really eat before he becomes sick or before the other kids take a piece.If there is only one cake what are the other kids suppose to do. I have noticed this, the Republicans have this attitude of not sharing make the most money at any cost and they are the most religious types yet they do give the most to charity(tax purposes maybe). It seems they are torn.

Your opportunities depends on who your parents are or where you were born. Born in Africa you are S.O.L. Being Religious wouldn't you have more empathy.

Redistributing candy eh? Kinda like when we bailed out the banks.. or got forced to at least. Yeah i see the point you're trying to make, so when will the rich be paying back those billions again?

We're just basically screwed. Redistribution just means everyone gets to suffer equally.

I admit, I once had a dream of a world based on fairness and equality. A place of techno magic where the "machines" did the work and everyone got to enjoy the fruits of that...but this is not reality. Those that build the machines are going to take the lion's share of the spoils.

The world is not fair and the reason it is not fair is because it is filled with humans. We are NOT a fair species. We are predatory opportunists. We see an advantage, we take it...even at the detriment of another human being.

I do find the religious hypocrisy these days to be rather comical. If anyone would "actually read" the New Testament, they would find a completely different "ideal" than what most wealthy "Christians" believe in. But so it is, and there is nothing anyone can or will ever do to fix it. I do not harbor ill will to those that have been "blessed" or just overly fortunate. I might have an issue if I "know" they went about it in mean spirited or unscrupulous methods...but who am I?

As long as greed, gluttony, envy, anger and lust are filling the souls of human beings...we will always have the haves and the have nots...even the Bible tells us that the poor will always be among us. It is "our" personal testimony on how we deal with that. We can work to alleviate it, or we can ignore it. I study all philosophy and religion and it is my opinion that if there is a "universal mind" behind it all, one day we will have to explain ourselves for why we did the things we did. It might not be so easy for some people to explain that they lived for now and allowed terrible suffering to happen all around them...but then again...I do not pretend to know the reasons that things are the way they are.

Originally posted by LeoStarchild

Makes me want to give that buzzard a leg drop from the top rope.

Umm, wow. That is pretty sick. Open your damn eyes and realize that it is just eating. When you see a human about to eat anything, be it a salad, some meat, whatever, do you feel like attacking them? Grow up.

As for the kids and candy, about the point raised earlier where kid A lives in a more candy filled area than kid B, You cant blame kid B for picking that spot, or praise kid A for picking his. Those choices were made by their parents, and before that, society. The kid surely didnt choose where to be born, his parents surely(99%) didnt make the area they live in more crime riddled and poverty stricken.