Are you in favor of a redistribution of wealth?

Question

Do you believe that you are entitled to receive earnings from someone elses efforts? This is what socialism will permit and promotes.

Answer 1

No, I'm absolutely NOT in favor of redistribution of wealth, here at home nor globally.  And, what some people have failed to realize is that an Obama presidency would do just that:

"Under the Obama plan, because some taxpayers get a tax cut and others get a substantial tax increase, the overall distribution of the federal tax burden changes quite considerably.

In short, the Obama plan would redistribute more than $131 billion per year from the top 1 percent of taxpayers to all other taxpayers. In 2009, for example, Tax Policy Center figures show that after the income-shifting in the Obama plan, the top 1 percent of taxpayers would pay a greater share of the total federal tax burden than the bottom 80 percent of Americans combined. In other words, 1.13 million Americans would pay more in all federal taxes than 128 million of their fellow citizens combined.

These figures do not include the impact of Obama's proposal to apply Social Security payroll taxes on incomes above $250,000. According to Tax Policy Center estimates, this plan would increase the tax burden of top earners by an additional $40 billion in 2009 alone and more than $629 billion over the next ten years. By itself, the $40 billion tax hike is twice as much as all the federal taxes paid by people in the bottom quintile combined.

To put the Obama plan in context, it is important to understand how divided America's tax burden already is between a large group of Americans who pay little or nothing and a shrinking group of upper-income taxpayers who shoulder the lion's share of the burden."

Check out this chart of "Tax Increases or Decreases Faced by Different Income Groups under Obama's Plan":

http://bp0.blogger.com/_qnd3N-LwY5Y/SGTv...

and...

February 2008:      "Unnoticed by most Americans this week, the Obama/Hagel GLOBAL POVERTY ACT was quickly approved by a senate committee and cleared for the next step, debate in a democrat-controlled senate.

    The GLOBAL POVERTY ACT is unique in its breathtaking scope. It is not foreign-aid. The Act will require the President and Congress to set aside .07% of the annual gross national product - our GNP - to be distributed around the globe to relieve poverty at a cost of about $800 billion dollars annually to taxpayers. It is Barack Obama’s response to the call of the Bali Global Warming Conference for a global carbon tax; a blatant redistribution of the planet’s wealth to the “powerless”.

    Coupled with his riveting stump speeches which generate huge emotional reactions from his equally huge audiences - speeches which literally call for a redistribution of wealth right here at home as well - Barack Obama’s sponsorship of the GLOBAL POVERTY ACT gives us a chilling preview of an Obama presidency."

Americans need to take a good, long look at the FACTS before deciding who they want to vote for in November and the possible ramifications of each candidate's presidency.  I, for one, do not support socialist programs such as wealth distribution and, as a result, will not be voting for Obama.

Answer 2

No, but at the same time, I don't believe that someone should receive the earnings from my efforts.

John Thain, former CEO of Meryl Lynch received a severance package estimated at 161 million dollars (after causing an estimated 9.8 billion dollars damage).

This is more money than I could ever dream of making (as a top of the class chemical engineering student).

However, I will contribute greatly to society and receive relatively negligible compensation.

I don't believe that we should get rid of the market distribution because we cannot yet have an efficient centralized distribution.  We can, however, tax those crazy windfall profits from people who ruin the economy to pay for health care, education and job-training programs.

So, do you think that others are entitled to receive earning from your efforts?

Answer 3

Depends were you are coming from. Such as   Health care, you don,t pay the high prices, then die early. Can,t afford gas to go to work to feed your family, tough. Can,t afford an Education then work at MC Donald's. Who needs Public transportation?  Who needs Unions.  Those people that put there faith in Enron and lost it all.     Whats faith got to do with it? We are far from being socialist, smells more like slavery. What happen to the pursuit of happiness?  How about Salmonella on our dinner plates, The World Trade Organizations have gutted our FDA. Now that your SICK of hereing of such things. Got Healthcare!

Answer 4

Against redistribution of wealth. There are a lot of wealthy people who are in favor of it, but not with their money. They want the government to do the redistribution through welfare programs.

Answer 5

AAAAAA WIndfall profits fall on consumer not producers.  FYI.

Answer 6

Before thinking about this, the government must do the following:

Firstly, the government has to make an economic reengineering, with sweeping administrative changes.

Second: To analyze the distribution of the country's wealth and social priorities that have.

Third: To determine if indeed  requires a more equitable redistribution. Is important  verify the main social and economic indicators.

Fourth: There is always the option, more taxes against those who earn more, luxury, etc.,  which may be the best choice to make more effective redeployment, without affecting the taxpayer, having contributed more into the system.

In today's world, social democracy is imposing  in developed countries, with the exceptions already known.

Answer 7

i'm against it!