• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wealth Inequality in America: Viral Video

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
I think your post holds a valuable point. People should help the poor and less fortunate. This is rewarding and laudable. But people should not be forced to help the poor and less fortunate. This is theft.

Agreed.

People should not be forced to help the rich either. Theft is theft.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Oh, and I do love these discussions that lead to justification of the vast majority of people in an entire demographic that are starving, homeless, without access to medicine outside of the E.R.....that they really don't deserve it unless they do "real work."
Let's say they deserve more pay.
Do they bear responsibility for choosing a poorly paid profession with full knowledge of this?
What should be done about it?

And then assume that people like me who wish to change the system are just a bunch of Commies who don't believe in a free market and want to give a paycheck from tax revenue to any schmuck who can "shuffle off to buffalo." The assumption is that I want to reward poor people by stealing from everybody else and give to dancers who deserve to be poor. And the cognitive dissonance that exists is that people in my profession are being stolen FROM and being given to the rich.
I'd never assume that about you. You're my great ally & fellow running dog of capitalism!
I sometimes confuse this matter because my responses address more than just your post.

I posted an article not too long ago that said, "If dancers didn't sometimes sleep with rich people, the industry would cease to exist." And there's a lot of truth to that statement.
I'm all for dancers sleeping with rich folk....men with women, women with men, women with women, men with men, & women with women.

Anybody been to fundraiser galas? I have. How many people are aware of the hookups that happen when you mix people with a lot of money who are looking for a good time with people who physically display a tremendous athleticism and refinement?
I sense a TV series in this somewhere.

I'm not saying that hookups should be banned. Heck, some fond memories have come out of these very galas.....of politicians, deacons, doctors, attorneys.....:p
Sigh.....I never was invited to such soirees.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
You're making my point. One, she doesn't work for minimum wage. Two, if she wants to earn a bigger paycheck she may have to explore another field. Her situation is neither the fault nor the responsibility of society.
It is indeed a dire problem though when a college grad makes barely anything above minimum wage. And while $7.35 technically isn't minimum wage, does that extra ten cents really make a difference?

Yeshua was big on getting your lazy butt out in the fields and go to work. He also gave the parable of the vineyard where each person agreed to work for a given sum. At the end of the day there seem to be some inequality in pay. However, the grower said you knew what the pay was going in and you agreed to it. Does it matter what others make?
Jesus, by no stretch of the imagination, was a Socialist.
Wrong!

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' 44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life”. Matthew 25
My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism. 2Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. 3If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, "Here's a good seat for you," but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet," 4have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 5Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? 6But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
Jesus didn't just promote socialism, he COMMANDED it!

But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just. [Luke 14:13 &14.]

If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. [Matthew 19:21]
Want me to go on proving Jesus would disapprove of anything not based on socialism?

I think your post holds a valuable point. People should help the poor and less fortunate. This is rewarding and laudable. But people should not be forced to help the poor and less fortunate. This is theft.
Jesus COMMANDED and DEMANDED that his followers help and assist the poor, and to view the poor as no differently than the rich.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Let's say they deserve more pay.
Do they bear responsibility for choosing a poorly paid profession with full knowledge of this?
What should be done about it?
There is a world of difference between choosing a career field that doesn't pay alot, and being stuck in a reality of low-paying jobs that barely cover the bills, if they even do that.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
[
QUOTE
It is indeed a dire problem though when a college grad makes barely anything above minimum wage. And while $7.35 technically isn't minimum wage, does that extra ten cents really make a difference?


Wrong!



Jesus didn't just promote socialism, he COMMANDED it!


Want me to go on proving Jesus would disapprove of anything not based on socialism?


Jesus COMMANDED and DEMANDED that his followers help and assist the poor, and to view the poor as no differently than the rich.

Sorry but Yeshua was just giving voice to what should be basic human nature. No where did he say to a disciple "Jake, go over to the Goldbergs and grab their mutton and matzoh and give it to the Fieldsteins. The Fieldsteins look a little hungry." A Socialist would take from you and give to others through power. That's the difference.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
For Mystic:
Some time ago, the Cato Institute made a revenue neutral tax reform proposal.
(I can't find a link, so I go by memory.)
1) A flat 17% income tax for all.
2) Every adult gets $10,000 per year, regardless of need.

#1 was very progressive for low wage earners because of #2.
#2 eliminated a whole lotta bureacracy while providing a safety net.
#1 eliminated severe penalties for welfare recipients who want to work.
Think this would help struggling artists?
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
For Mystic:
Some time ago, the Cato Institute made a revenue neutral tax reform proposal.
(I can't find a link, so I go by memory.)
1) A flat 17% income tax for all.
2) Every adult gets $10,000 per year, regardless of need.

#1 was very progressive for low wage earners because of #2.
#2 eliminated a whole lotta bureacracy while providing a safety net.
#1 eliminated severe penalties for welfare recipients who want to work.
Think this would help struggling artists?

The "devil's" in the details as they say. And how would this effect those at the top receiving tax expenditures? And what would this look like if we went to war and had to pay for it?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The "devil's" in the details as they say. And how would this effect those at the top receiving tax expenditures? And what would this look like if we went to war and had to pay for it?
I don't know what you mean by "those at the top receiving tax expenditures".
Since the plan is revenue neutral, we'd have the same money available for war as before.
But I'd say that less war is a good idea no matter how we raise revenue.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Oh, and I do love these discussions that lead to justification of the vast majority of people in an entire demographic that are starving, homeless, without access to medicine outside of the E.R.....that they really don't deserve it unless they do "real work."

And then assume that people like me who wish to change the system are just a bunch of Commies who don't believe in a free market and want to give a paycheck from tax revenue to any schmuck who can "shuffle off to buffalo." The assumption is that I want to reward poor people by stealing from everybody else and give to dancers who deserve to be poor. And the cognitive dissonance that exists is that people in my profession are being stolen FROM and being given to the rich.

It's the strange canard: When rich people try to make more money doing what they do, it is called "capitalism" and it is praised. When poor people try to make more money doing what they do, they are demonized as greedy and lazy.
 

Apex

Somewhere Around Nothing
If some choose jobs which simply don't pay that well, when they could've chosen a better one, then I see no obligation to
support them. There just isn't a lot of demand for live dance performances, & dancers know this when entering the field.

If I decide my life's calling is to be a street mime trapped in an invisible box,
should you be forced to cover my income-v-expense shortfall?

First, I am talking about a medical profession. Second, no one is saying anything about forcing you to support someone. It is quite simple, make minimum wage a livable one. Would costs of certain services and goods go up, yes. But no one is forcing society to pay for those services should they choose not to.

Also, choice is a luxury in this job market that for most people is unrealistic. There is a reason images like this have been making their way around social networks:
I-cant-get-a-job-because-i-dont-have-experiance-circle.jpg


And another one of my favorites is a requirement that is popping up for most entry level positions today, it generally reads something like this:
"Must have at least two years full time experience to apply for ________ entry level position."
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
First, I am talking about a medical profession. Second, no one is saying anything about forcing you to support someone. It is quite simple, make minimum wage a livable one. Would costs of certain services and goods go up, yes. But no one is forcing society to pay for those services should they choose not to.
We had a thread about making the min wage a livable one, & I recall great disagreement about what was "livable", even in a given area.
If this meant raising wages very much, it could mean a great loss of jobs, since many services, eg, dance performances, concerts, are
easily done without. It's not like farming, where if all raise their prices, just as many people will still eat as before.

Also, choice is a luxury in this job market that for most people is unrealistic.
People will say there is no choice, when what really happens is that they dismiss many of their choices. Yes, times are tougher than before,
& prospects of improvement are lousy, so many of us have to make unappetizing choices. But a greatly increased min wage could reduce them.

There is a reason images like this have been making their way around social networks:
I-cant-get-a-job-because-i-dont-have-experiance-circle.jpg


And another one of my favorites is a requirement that is popping up for most entry level positions today, it generally reads something like this:
"Must have at least two years full time experience to apply for ________ entry level position."
People have loads of excuses why they can't get their first job.
But everyone I know does get their first job.
 
Last edited:

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
It's the strange canard: When rich people try to make more money doing what they do, it is called "capitalism" and it is praised. When poor people try to make more money doing what they do, they are demonized as greedy and lazy.

To be fair, everyone is praised and demonized by someone. The truth is there are hard-working poor people and lazy poor people, and that there are hard-working rich people and lazy rich people. Everybody needs to get beyond their oversimplified rhetoric and emotional biases if we are to have any chance of fixing a broken economic system. Being that the wealthy have the most to lose, you'd figure they would be at the forefront of exploring pragmatic solutions.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Nah, you didn't get it.
Carping about missing points cuts both ways.

Didn't get what? That you are on some strange crusade to force your ridiculous interpretation on that Obama quote? That you completely ignored the graph that I was actually talking about?

Care to actually address what I was talking about? Or would you prefer to go on another tangent about that Obama quote when nobody else but you is talking about it?
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
Let's say they deserve more pay.
Do they bear responsibility for choosing a poorly paid profession with full knowledge of this?
What should be done about it?

Dunno yet. But I'm working on it. ;)

I'd never assume that about you. You're my great ally & fellow running dog of capitalism!
I sometimes confuse this matter because my responses address more than just your post.


I'm all for dancers sleeping with rich folk....men with women, women with men, women with women, men with men, & women with women.


I sense a TV series in this somewhere.


Sigh.....I never was invited to such soirees.

Don't be too jealous. The more secretive hookups were the rich guys and the male danseurs, and of course they officially "never happened", but overall I'd lose out from time to time too. :shrug:
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Didn't get what? That you are on some strange crusade to force your ridiculous interpretation on that Obama quote?
You think I'm using "force"? I'm just opining, & you're perfectly free to disagree.
If my take on his quote is "ridiculous", then I should point out that I find yours shallow & tendentious.
But now that we've taken pot shots at each other, back to.....

That you completely ignored the graph that I was actually talking about?
Care to actually address what I was talking about? Or would you prefer to go on another tangent about that Obama quote when nobody else but you is talking about it?
I have addressed the graph. And I'll be glad to address any of your concerns, but I ask that you restate them for convenience & clarity.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
To be fair, everyone is praised and demonized by someone.
I meant by the same someones, like conservatives, or Revoltingest.

They think that corporations should be allowed to do anything in order to raise their profits. And yet the cry foul when unions try to get together to raise the profits of the workers. It's hypocritical. Either trying to make the most amount of money possible (capitalism) is praiseworthy, or it is not. It shouldn't matter who is doing it.

The truth is there are hard-working poor people and lazy poor people, and that there are hard-working rich people and lazy rich people. Everybody needs to get beyond their oversimplified rhetoric and emotional biases if we are to have any chance of fixing a broken economic system. Being that the wealthy have the most to lose, you'd figure they would be at the forefront of exploring pragmatic solutions.
Why fix something when it is providing a rather cushy lifestyle?

And I really think the issue is more about government, and particularly, the antiquated, broken economic model that conservatives cling to that is the problem.
 
Top