|
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255702
reading that post, and some of the thread replies made me raeg on the inside, but instead of calling someone a dick and getting banned i decided id just post my response (and general rantings) in a blog.
the fact is, rich people get rich off of others peoples backs. this isnt as negative as it sounds, its just a simple fact that the only way to get money is to take it from other people, even if they want to buy what your selling.
mr buffet makes a point that isnt made often enough, but to make it more clear for people who are a bit simple heres the fact. even if capital gains tax was at 99%, do you think people would shy away from a good investment? not a chance in hell. if it makes them money, its a good investment, any tax rate below 100% doesnt change that.
and
how hard you work has almost no correlation to how rich you are. the hardest working people in the world are the poorest of the poor who walk for miles for clean water, and yet they earn the least. and yet sitting on your ass behind a desk in the tech industry offers some of the best paying jobs in the world, let alone an inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions.
the rich seem to be of this idea that they worked hard for what they have and therefore shouldnt have to share it with everyone else, and yet in reality. in almost all cases, the richest people have had the easiest time and any idea that they shouldn't be helping others in in fact a little disgusting.
socialist countries with the highest tax rates are consistently voted to have the best standards of living in the world, the best health care and the best education. investment in these countries isnt low because guess what? even if your business was taxed to go there, its still MORE BUSINESS and you will make money from working there. and yet one of the more right wing countries (the US) has come off of the best set of circumstances possible and yet managed to throw away having the leading economy and even its AAA credit rating.
maybe when the american right is finally shown to be full of bull they can put their country back on track :D
the hilarious part is the american left is hardly any better. they would still be considered right wing in most of europe and come across has weak minded, ineffective hypocrites, who pander so much to anyone who would listen so they can still get voted in that im not even sure i care who wins the next election in the US.
  
|
'how hard you work has almost no correlation to how rich you are. the hardest working people in the world are the poorest of the poor who walk for miles for clean water, and yet they earn the least. and yet sitting on your ass behind a desk in the tech industry offers some of the best paying jobs in the world, let alone an inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions.'
im gonna single that bit out the most cos its the craziest.
Those people who have to walk for miles to get clean water - that isnt their job is it? thats the need to survive. You put one of these rich people who dont/havent worked enough in that situation - telling them the only water is miles away and you gotta walk and carry all this water back, and its not even clean, and they'd do it. So i find that an invalid point
and from the second half of youre post you must have very little knowledge of how economics work. 'An inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions' You've heard of supply and demand yes? thats what every economy in the world is made up of, its the foundations of economics.
|
On August 17 2011 07:57 ThatGuy89 wrote:
'how hard you work has almost no correlation to how rich you are. the hardest working people in the world are the poorest of the poor who walk for miles for clean water, and yet they earn the least. and yet sitting on your ass behind a desk in the tech industry offers some of the best paying jobs in the world, let alone an inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions.'
im gonna single that bit out the most cos its the craziest.
Those people who have to walk for miles to get clean water - that isnt their job is it? thats the need to survive. You put one of these rich people who dont/havent worked enough in that situation - telling them the only water is miles away and you gotta walk and carry all this water back, and its not even clean, and they'd do it. So i find that an invalid point
and from the second half of youre post you must have very little knowledge of how economics work. 'An inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions' You've heard of supply and demand yes? thats what every economy in the world is made up of, its the foundations of economics.
That isn't what he mean't at all by that comment.... -.- What he mean't is that the Hardest working people whom are so poor they have to walk miles to get clean water. Not that it's their job, these guys work their asses off 16-20 hours a day and get paid pennies and they still don't have a decent home/living standard. While you have people who used other people to piggy back their way to the top.
|
let alone an inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions.
This is by far the stupidest sentence in this whole rant. Startups are putting in 16 hour days and chances are they will still fail. You only know about the business that worked; never the ones that failed. Even web companies like google, youtube, facebook, etc. still required an immense amount of work to get where they are. I'm sure some of the core ideas were appeared as a flash of insight or were developed quickly, but you saying "dude you got that idea in 1 second and you're making millions!" is stupid.
Now if you're talking about some souljaboy-wannabe-retard with no talent who puts it on youtube, suddenly has a million hits, then has a record deal in a few months then yes I agree.
|
With regards the how much people work discussion, even in developed countries where people don't need to go to such extremes, the people who do the longest hours of the most labour intensive work with the fewest holidays and perks under the worst conditions are the one's who're also the poorest in society.
The only time working hard makes you richer is if you work hard at one specific thing and are unsually gifted at it, or work hard (with a fairly well off background usually) at college/university, but even then most people who're rich were born rich.
Sure there are some people do geneuinely make it, but if it was simply a case of working hard and thus earning it being inevitable, the current capitalist system would crumble as everyone could suddenly just "be" rich.
|
On August 17 2011 08:17 Ender wrote:This is by far the stupidest sentence in this whole rant. Startups are putting in 16 hour days and chances are they will still fail. You only know about the business that worked; never the ones that failed. Even web companies like google, youtube, facebook, etc. still required an immense amount of work to get where they are. I'm sure some of the core ideas were appeared as a flash of insight or were developed quickly, but you saying "dude you got that idea in 1 second and you're making millions!" is stupid. Now if you're talking about some souljaboy-wannabe-retard with no talent who puts it on youtube, suddenly has a million hits, then has a record deal in a few months then yes I agree.
I agreed with everything in the OP except what you pointed out. Creating something new and unique then having it succeed is tremendously difficult in today's world. Heck, achieving success doesn't particularly mean it'll stay. Look at Netflix and how intent the movie industry is to have it forced into obsolescence.
Innovation is something to be celebrated. Whoever made money off of the 'fart button' and 'that's what she said button' apps for phones are not innovators, and it's a shame providing a dumb source of distraction is so well-celebrated.
|
United States5162 Posts
Your view of 'hardest working' is very naive imo. The way you define it, it means physical labor and a desk job is obviously easy and deserves less. Unskilled labor is called unskilled for a reason - the difference between someone who started last week and someone who's been doing it for years is quite small if they put forth the same amount of effort. It's basic supply and demand. Physical labor is very abundant, skilled labor is not.
And I don't see how European politics is so much better. They might lean farther left, but it still seems like the same pandering bullshit. They certainly don't seem to be doing any better in handling the debt problems.
I guess I kinda agree with the rest though. Raising taxes doesn't stop job growth, though it might cut out a small % of jobs that would have been there(it is less money to reinvest after all), but people will always find a niche to make money from.
|
Take a university level course in basic economics. Then we'll talk. Until then, most of your ranting doesn't even deserve a reply.
Edit: I just want to clear up this huge misconception: how much "hard work" you put in means nothing; It's all about how much utility, or value, your work adds to the economy. You can pay a poor person to dig holes and fill them back up over and over again for years, but theres no demand for that and adds no value to the economy. While a genius who could come up with the cure for cancer overnight (highly exaggerated example) contributes far more utility than the poor person ever will.
Your posts reminds me very much of Marx: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
|
If 99% of my income is taxed, I'll just move my investments somewhere else
|
On August 17 2011 08:17 Ender wrote:This is by far the stupidest sentence in this whole rant. Startups are putting in 16 hour days and chances are they will still fail.
i never mentioned start up businesses
On August 17 2011 08:26 maahes`ra wrote:
I agreed with everything in the OP except what you pointed out. Creating something new and unique then having it succeed is tremendously difficult in today's world.
its difficult, im not saying anyone can reinvent the wheel, the point was merely that you can get lucky and strike it rich with almost no effort, not that many people do,
On August 17 2011 08:51 Myles wrote:
Your view of 'hardest working' is very naive imo. The way you define it, it means physical labor and a desk job is obviously easy and deserves less. Unskilled labor is called unskilled for a reason
i wasnt talking about people who do a skilled job, im talking about people who answer phones for a living. even the entry level unskilled tech job puts you in the top 1ish% earners in the world
On August 17 2011 08:57 Try wrote:
Edit: I just want to clear up this huge misconception: how much "hard work" you put in means nothing; It's all about how much utility, or value, your work adds to the economy.
but thats an almost irrelevent point.
you can take a 5 week course in basic computer crap and have 'more utility' in todays economy than someone who was born in a third world country. being born into a position where you can do this 5 week, 1 year, 4 year course isnt hard work, its a lottery.
if you were born in another country getting even half as far would take 100 times the effort so you should still feel privileged to be where you are, and thankful to everyone below you, even if you feel you worked hard
fuck it, ignore the 3rd world example, just compare people born into your 2.4 children suburban family compared to people born into ghettos with shitty schools, shitty people around them etc etc
|
[B]
the fact is, rich people get rich off of others peoples backs. this isnt as negative as it sounds, its just a simple fact that the only way to get money is to take it from other people, even if they want to buy what your selling.
This is simply not true. If I made a profit by trading one thing for another, it was my work as a trader reallocating resources for which I am being paid. You could argue that because I have not produced any new material, I do not deserve money for my efforts. I would counter argue that I have made the already produced material worth more: for instance, giving 1000 dollars to a farmer for a cow would be a good trade for both me and the farmer, because he needs money more than one extra cow. Then, if I traded the same cow for $2000 to a hamburger store, it would be worth it for them too because they need the meat to facilitate their operation. So, in essence, I have just created 1000 dollars for the economy, by giving both the farmer and the store owner good deals while still making a profit. This is essentially what investors do, albeit on an extremely larger scale. They might not have to work as hard as others physically for their money, but it is valid money which is the fruit of their labors nonetheless.
|
On August 17 2011 09:19 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 08:17 Ender wrote:let alone an inventor who puts in a few hours once, and can make millions. This is by far the stupidest sentence in this whole rant. Startups are putting in 16 hour days and chances are they will still fail. i never mentioned start up businesses Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 08:26 maahes`ra wrote:
I agreed with everything in the OP except what you pointed out. Creating something new and unique then having it succeed is tremendously difficult in today's world. its difficult, im not saying anyone can reinvent the wheel, the point was merely that you can get lucky and strike it rich with almost no effort, not that many people do, Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 08:51 Myles wrote:
Your view of 'hardest working' is very naive imo. The way you define it, it means physical labor and a desk job is obviously easy and deserves less. Unskilled labor is called unskilled for a reason i wasnt talking about people who do a skilled job, im talking about people who answer phones for a living. even the entry level unskilled tech job puts you in the top 1ish% earners in the world Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 08:57 Try wrote:
Edit: I just want to clear up this huge misconception: how much "hard work" you put in means nothing; It's all about how much utility, or value, your work adds to the economy. but thats an almost irrelevent point. you can take a 5 week course in basic computer crap and have 'more utility' in todays economy than someone who was born in a third world country. being born into a position where you can do this 5 week, 1 year, 4 year course isnt hard work, its a lottery. if you were born in another country getting even half as far would take 100 times the effort so you should still feel privileged to be where you are, and thankful to everyone below you, even if you feel you worked hard fuck it, ignore the 3rd world example, just compare people born into your 2.4 children suburban family compared to people born into ghettos with shitty schools, shitty people around them etc etc
I'm confused. Are you arguing that there is not enough equality of opportunity, or that there is not enough equality of result? Or both? Also, the vast majority of rich people worked very hard to get there; we're talking 16-18 hours a day. Sure, there are people that win the lottery, but that constitutes a fraction of a fraction. Its a mistake to generalize them into the entire upper class.
If anything, the people who have it easy are the bourgeoisie middle class who have parents pay for college, get a degree, and work a middle class job at 3-5x the salary of the poor. If we should really blame anyone for "having it easy," its the vast majority of middleclass professionals.
|
On August 17 2011 07:34 turdburgler wrote:
mr buffet makes a point that isnt made often enough, but to make it more clear for people who are a bit simple heres the fact. even if capital gains tax was at 99%, do you think people would shy away from a good investment? not a chance in hell. if it makes them money, its a good investment, any tax rate below 100% doesnt change that.
Whoa what? Maybe for the superrich who have an unlimited income to deduct, but for regular investors:
Let's say you have a fantastic investment where you invest $10 mill. 50% it will increase to $30 mill and 50% it will decrease to $0.
Without tax, your EV is $15 million, meaning you make $5 mill on average.
With 99% tax, you have a 50% chance of losing $10 million, and a 50% chance of gaining 1%*20 mill = $200k.
Suddenly it became an awful investment.
|
Capitalism is like a very fat person who loves eating. If you say they shouldn't have the food in front of them, it's very offensive to them.
|
United States5162 Posts
On August 17 2011 09:19 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 08:51 Myles wrote:
Your view of 'hardest working' is very naive imo. The way you define it, it means physical labor and a desk job is obviously easy and deserves less. Unskilled labor is called unskilled for a reason i wasnt talking about people who do a skilled job, im talking about people who answer phones for a living. even the entry level unskilled tech job puts you in the top 1ish% earners in the world
Well, I don't think that's really a valid point. Simply being in a developed nation puts in the top 10% of earners. And I don't think many would argue that there are far less opportunities in less developed nations. I also don't see how people who only answer phones get more then $20/hr, but that's kinda beside the point.
|
On August 17 2011 09:41 ninazerg wrote:
Capitalism is like a very fat person who loves eating. If you say they shouldn't have the food in front of them, it's very offensive to them.
This is offensive to both capitalists and fat people. And on top of that, this analogy makes no sense whatsoever.
|
On August 17 2011 08:17 Ender wrote:
Show nested quote +
This is by far the stupidest sentence in this whole rant. Startups are putting in 16 hour days and chances are they will still fail.
i never mentioned start up businesses
Then how will you make millions on an invention? Are you going to pay a boatload for a patent that may be worthless then go around trying sell the patent to companies who will either laugh at you or create a slight variation of the same product? Mind you, for a product that was invented in hours...
|
On August 17 2011 09:36 Try wrote:
Also, the vast majority of rich people worked very hard to get there; we're talking 16-18 hours a day.
Where did you get this information from?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
