Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-21-2015, 05:47 AM
 
495 posts, read 609,179 times
Reputation: 373

Advertisements

Are these not very similar concepts? Redistributive change, wikipedia

Says it's like "redistribution of wealth" legalized by legal twisting of poverty being a class needing privileges, and equal school funding as a court case law pretext to judicial court reinterpretation of law to bring redistribution of wealth ?

Then Obama in 2001 said "the tragedy of the civil rights movement" was it did not lead to the redistributive change to bring about redistribution of wealth

Also I feel like "redistributive change" can be yet another expression where "change" means "spare change"...like instead of giving a beggar spare change, it is given to the beggar by ...."redistributing the spare change from taxpayer to recipient"....hence the adjective describing this spare change is ........"redistributive" change!

Or is redistributive change to HIV, as redistribution of wealth is to full-blown AIDS.

Redistributive change is a case pretext that precedes redistribution of wealth
Redistributive change is to the on-site job interview as Redistribution of wealth is to the job offer

Once you have redistributive change, then case law is on the side that all other forms of wealth inequality are legally challenge-able in courts to order redistribution of wealth as interpreted in the meaning of "establishing Justice" and "promoting the General welfare"

Last edited by Ericthebean; 02-21-2015 at 06:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Central Ohio
10,823 posts, read 14,898,817 times
Reputation: 16537
???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:12 AM
 
Location: Western North Carolina
1,296 posts, read 1,116,999 times
Reputation: 2010
"Redistributive change" and "Redistribution of wealth" are synonyms of the original term, robbery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:15 AM
 
Location: Central Ohio
10,823 posts, read 14,898,817 times
Reputation: 16537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Last1Out View Post
"Redistributive change" and "Redistribution of wealth" are synonyms of the original term, robbery.
I got it, getting something for nothing is being fair?

Blaming successful people for your own failures?

Blaming society because you're personally a dud?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:18 AM
 
5,341 posts, read 6,503,700 times
Reputation: 6107
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity . . . . What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving . . . . The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else . . . .. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation . . . .You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

- Adrian Rogers, 1931



The problem with socialism is that "Eventually, Socialists run out of other peoples' money [to spend]."

Margaret Thatcher
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Laurentia
5,580 posts, read 7,980,431 times
Reputation: 2442
"Redistributive change" etymologically would mean a form of social, political, or economic change where something is redistributed, usually property or power.

The Wikipedia article defines it as:

Quote:
[...] a legal theory of economic justice in the context of U.S. law that promotes the recognition of poverty as a classification, like race, ethnicity, gender, and religion, that should likewise draw extra scrutiny from the courts in matters pertaining to civil rights.
So, poverty being recognized as a legal class similar to race, sex, and religion is what the OP is talking about; while that has obvious appeal and utility to wealth-redistributionists, I don't believe there is any necessary connection between the two concepts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,660,138 times
Reputation: 24860
The problem is that a mass consumption society like ours cannot long survive if the wealth redistribution is only from the people that labor to produce the goods to the people that own the production facilities. We see this in the automobile industry where, without United Auto Workers Union wages and benefits, most workers cannot afford new cars without heavily subsidized debt. A $20k to $30k new car is not feasible for someone with a $1,500/mo income after their housing, food and clothing are paid for from their income.

Our economy has very efficiently practiced wealth redistribution from the people that create the wealth to the people that own it. Our top 1% have gained tremendous wealth while the middle 30% to 70% have lost or stagnated under the inevitable inflation created by the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:39 AM
 
495 posts, read 609,179 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
"Redistributive change" etymologically would mean a form of social, political, or economic change where something is redistributed, usually property or power.

The Wikipedia article defines it as:



So, poverty being recognized as a legal class similar to race, sex, and religion is what the OP is talking about; while that has obvious appeal and utility to wealth-redistributionists, I don't believe there is any necessary connection between the two concepts.
But here is the root of redistributive change. Because race is a "legal class" and when Brown vs Board of Education 1954 case ruled "Sepatate but equal on "legal class" as unconstitutional, the court used its judicial powers to force the segregated schools, justifiably (not disagreeing with this at all), to pay for whatever additional administrative burdens would be needed to set up the schools for new and larger desegregated classrooms.

Once this came out of Brown v Board of Education, the theory came out that "hey, if we can make 'poverty' a legal class same as was 'race', then we can say schools and services in "poor poverty" communities are analogous to pre-1954 African American underfunded schools. Then by referring again back to Brown v Board of Education, the court can interpret a forcing of some people to have to pay more to desegregate the class of poverty from the class of non-poverty.... And this direction of case law you can see....is the cradle of legal and court-driven redistribution of wealth via redistributive change.

It becomes "redistribution of wealth" once municipalities are left with no choice but to either 1) raise local taxes, or 2) eat up grant funds from Federal Govt's General Fund and consequently cause Federal Govt to raise income taxes, to pay for services that Govt legally forces upon municipalities in the name of desegregating Rich institutions from poor ones. Using this mechanism, you can create disincentives in wealthier establishments, to work, causing the same effect as Pure redistribution of wealth. The difference with redistributive change appears to be it's done at the zipcode level instead of the individual level. This is what Obama wants as a community organizer of a lower income housing project municipality from when he was a Chicagoan.

Last edited by Ericthebean; 02-21-2015 at 06:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 06:49 AM
 
11,086 posts, read 8,522,995 times
Reputation: 6392
All of this illustrates how pathetic the leeches are.

Eventually, the checks will just stop. They'll adapt or die.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2015, 08:11 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,318 posts, read 16,634,674 times
Reputation: 13327
Anytime the gov't has a play on words, they're lying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top