| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25013 Posts
On April 19 2013 13:51 DeepElemBlues wrote: How high should the death tax be then? Shouldn't need one. Rather than penalise those who have a wealthy background, with all the opportunities that opens up, concentrate on helping those who don't, have said opportunities. Don't really care for specifics how, just a general principle. | ||
|
Scootaloo
655 Posts
On April 19 2013 13:51 DeepElemBlues wrote: How high should the death tax be then? In a perfect world, 100%, in a broken one, 0%, you'd have to be a supernatural being to be able to determine where on that chart we are and give a absolute answer. What we do know however is that our current system does not work, and it simply leads to plutocracy, so clearly we're doing something wrong and it deserves to be questioned. Really, my main gripe with this whole idiocy is Americans trying to judge Europeans for a system of laws, that in a slightly altered version, they suffer much more from. On April 19 2013 13:52 Wombat_NI wrote: I don't agree that either form of inherited privilege is particularly beneficial to society or desirable, you're assuming I'm inconsistent in railing at the monarchy and giving a pass to other things, when I'm rather scathing of both. Fair enough, in an ideal world I'd favor the dissolution of royal houses as well, but in the one we live in they simply serve far more practical purposes then their costs, much like your initial statement I replied to, I havn't seen any argument that justifies completely removing them right now, perhaps if we ever reach the good ol' Gene Roddenberry-esque technocrat utopia, we can discuss this again. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25013 Posts
I don't think it's necessarily top of the agenda, but then, look at what is according to those in Government. | ||
|
Sanctimonius
United Kingdom861 Posts
Personally, I'm not sure where I stand on death duties. On the one hand, that money could be seen as earned, why should some of it go towards the state simply because I died? My kids should inherit and decide what to do with it, surely? And it comes to some situations where the beneficiaries need to sell things like property or heirlooms to pay for the valued death duty. On the other, plenty of people simply end up inheriting the money through no ability of their own. Death duties are simply a way of making sure they are still helping those less fortunate than themselves. But I don't think the death duties in the US are a cause of the current gross inequality of wealth. That's far more due to ridiculously low taxation and high spending enjoyed by the US (No taxes! But....we want roads, and Medicare, and Medicaid, and schools, and...), the low taxation on shares and stocks and the pathetically low minimum wages (what is it a minimum of? Because it certainly isn't the minimum amount necessary for a decent standard of living...). If you pay CEOs millions for failing companies and the cleaners get laid off from a decent wage then re-hired, part-time, with no healthcare, at minimum wage, then of course you end up with wealth inequality. Wages have stagnated while upper management and shareholders enjoy record dividends. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25013 Posts
| ||
|
BioTech
Australia264 Posts
Witness the Wall St bail-out in the wake of the GFC. Not one of these white collar crooks has face any charges...jail time seemingly out of the question. Oligarchy :^( | ||
|
Yurie
11800 Posts
On April 19 2013 15:14 BioTech wrote: Alas the United States has become an oligarchy which is far worse than any monarchy... Witness the Wall St bail-out in the wake of the GFC. Not one of these white collar crooks has face any charges...jail time seemingly out of the question. Oligarchy :^( Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning "few", and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command")[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, or military control A real monarchy is an oligarchy. You are probably looking for the word plutocracy. | ||
|
thezanursic
5478 Posts
While the USA *might* have been founded on ''the principles of freedom, republicanism, rule of law, gun ownership, and equality for all peoples.''. It is pretty bad at some of the above. There are a lot of countries I would much rather live in Canada, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands etc etc etc On April 19 2013 05:20 farvacola wrote: Why don't you get a bit past this formal obsession with political words and instead use these words in order to speak to actual ideas. It doesn't take a genius to see that top-heavy capital agglomeration and familial lines of inheritance follow fairly closely (not they they are in any sense overtly superimpositive). The inheritance of privilege is alive and well in the US no matter how many denotative darts you throw at it. It's not just alive and well... it's thriving *Cought* *cough* *chokes* On April 19 2013 05:19 DeepElemBlues wrote: Not all rich people in America (self-made or inherited wealth) care about or get involved in politics, there's a difference right there. Being born into the aristocracy in Europe back in the day meant that you were automatically invested and usually active in the political system. And I think you can agree that there is a much stronger populist strain in America than in Europe, the "1%" vs the "99%" is just an example of that. FDR campaigned on a very explicit anti-big business message in his reelection campaign in 1936. During the labor struggles of the late 18th and early 19th century populism was even more fierce than it is today, the campaigns to lower or end tariffs, the campaign for a silver standard, etc. Barack Obama attacked Mitt Romney's wealth mercilessly. George W. Bush was "born with a silver spoon in his mouth, on third base," that happened in the 2000 campaign. This country is very different from Europe, in the past or today (the aristocracy of blood in Europe has been replaced by the aristocracy of the technocrat and bureaucrat) when it comes to class. Do you live in the US? I don't, but I do know a few well informed people who do and from what I know multinational companies don't have a hard time buying the politics Oil companies - The global warming issues, Arms industry, Private prisons... I can think of a few more. I am not saying that only the US has issues, but it shouldn't be THE ideal. You guys have a couple of countries to look up to yourselves... | ||
|
Prog455
Denmark970 Posts
On April 19 2013 15:24 Yurie wrote: A real monarchy is an oligarchy. You are probably looking for the word plutocracy. Sorry but this is not true. Monarchy and oligarchy are two very different things, and i too agree that USA seems like an oligarchy. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
It's a silly relic of the past. And I'm all for democracy, not for gaining status at birth. However I like one idea about it, that it keeps nationalism away from politics. I could hate the current prime minister and still be loyal to my country since the queen, who hasn't much real political power, is the ruler. | ||
|
Crushinator
Netherlands2138 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_distribution_of_wealth Particularly when sorting for GINI. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10683 Posts
 . | ||
|
RockIronrod
Australia1369 Posts
A British friend of mine said it best, the Monarchy only has power until they actually trying doing anything with it. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10683 Posts
| ||
|
Maxie
Sweden2653 Posts
| ||
|
McBengt
Sweden1684 Posts
On April 19 2013 20:21 Maxie wrote: By the way, I wouldn't want to be the king of Sweden - he may be above the law in some ways, but he does not have religious freedom. I don't view him as above anyone else, he's just another human at a specific position. Well, you do get to hang out in strip clubs with mob bosses and grope random women, which could be fun I guess. It's kind of a funny limbo for the royal family, the live completely outside the law. They don't get to vote and their religion is decided for them from birth, yet they also have complete immunity from any criminal charges. I've lost count of how many times our cretinous wannabe-racer prince has been caught speeding or drunk driving, or both. And every time, the cops just have to let him go, they can't even stop him from continuing to drive even if he's inebriated. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On April 19 2013 20:11 Velr wrote: I find a "symbolic" Monarchy really, really terrible. From an ideological standpoint just as terrible as an actual Monarchy... You basically still accept that there is this "leader-class" and the "common-people" for no reason other than having an Ancestor which somehow made enough people believe that his blood was special (and slaughtering his way to power before that)... Today's monarchs are more like presidents in countries where presidents are just symbolic head's of state. Those are also often just put there and citizens pay for their living expenses. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On April 19 2013 20:34 McBengt wrote: Well, you do get to hang out in strip clubs with mob bosses and grope random women, which could be fun I guess. It's kind of a funny limbo for the royal family, the live completely outside the law. They don't get to vote and their religion is decided for them from birth, yet they also have complete immunity from any criminal charges. I've lost count of how many times our cretinous wannabe-racer prince has been caught speeding or drunk driving, or both. And every time, the cops just have to let him go, they can't even stop him from continuing to drive even if he's inebriated. Well that is actually pretty bad, why was this not changed in recent history ? | ||
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
It means there is a gathering figure, that doesn`t have to go thrugh all the political system of begging rich people for money, lyeing to voters, and then having to come up with some bullshit reason why s/he can not deliver on any of the promises. Elected heades of state mean, that only a certain kind of person, can get elected, that can go thrugh the grinder of political system. With monarchy, it is pure random, you can get a crappy monarch, that can not do shit, and would probably just resign anyway, an okayinsh one, that can do all the official stuff, parades, celebrations and such, withot fear of actually communicating with people, like the currently, always victimised and living in a sterilised intraction enviroment politicans, and hence, without having half of country activly disliking that person, or you can get a very decent person, that can have enought moral autority to have certan amount of soft power thrugh advocacy. IMO, monarchy is a pure win, and i`m perfectly fine with spending 10-20 dollars of my taxes yearly to have monarchy. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
The PondCast
RSL Revival
ByuN vs Classic
Clem vs Cham
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
herO vs SHIN
Reynor vs Cure
WardiTV European League
FEL
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
