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.
When taxing the rich, you have to remember that them paying their taxes is like them paying their fines: a couple of hundred thousand compared to all the money they have coming in is simply the cost of doing business for them. It's like you having to pay a quarter if you get a speeding ticket.
It's important to understand that what you pay in taxes isn't as important as what you have after you pay taxes.
If I have an income of 60,000 and my tax rate is 20%, then I pay $12,000 and what I have left to live on is $48,000.
Jeff Bezos has $181,300,000,000 and he pays a 50% tax, he has $90,650,000,000 left to live on.
Seriously, do you think he's going to hurt if he has to pay a little more in taxes?
Doesn't anyone understand this? This is where our federal programs go - THIS is why we don't have money for Social Security: The US government is estimated to have lost around 135 billion in revenue due to corporate tax avoidance in 2017.
I don’t know if you are intentionally trying to mislead, or if you just don’t understand how all this works (and what you’re saying), but after the the outright falsehoods of this post, no one should pay any attention to anything else you have to say.
Tax the rich? lol - like we don't already tax them. How much is enough?
High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes. In 2020, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.2 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.2 percent of total AGI and paid 42.3 percent of all federal income taxes
Could it be because they have all the money? Asking for a friend.
If the top 1 percent earned 22.2 percent of total AGI, why are they paying 42.3 percent of all federal income taxes? Shouldn’t that number be closer to 22.2%?
those stats were proved wrong …according to the irs ony 19% of seniors get 90% of their income from social security .according to the financial census in 2017 it was 12%
but in any case if they expect what amounts to a portion of their working income to have colas on it cover all expenses then they made a major miscalculation.
PS: simple inspection shows why the aei 'factcheck' is intentionally false and they admit as such.
You are confusing the circumstances people are in when they retire.
Ill leave it as short homework exercise to discover why. When you get stuck, just ask.
According to things the IRS says and publishes:
Quote:
A plurality of older Americans, 40.2 percent, only receive income from Social Security in retirement.
The nice thing is, we track this pretty well and congress' largest workload on the IRS is in fact 'fact finding queries' on the Individual tax database. (my god, do you know how many COPIES of it they maintain and refresh EVERY DAY!!!!)
And,to get back to the OP...back when I was a kid and my grandparents were retired (both SS, 1 had westinghouse pension <---plot point!) the annual increase was at least half eaten up each year by the plan B premium increases. As I fast approach FRA, my peers are reporting the same.
Your 401, pension, Roth etc, does NOT grant an annual COLA, so the effect of inflation v. retirement assets is spread across the entire population. As you pointed out, some fare better than others.
Doesn't anyone understand this? This is where our federal programs go - THIS is why we don't have money for Social Security: The US government is estimated to have lost around 135 billion in revenue due to corporate tax avoidance in 2017.
Rodentraiser, you are mistaken. That myth has been dispelled so many times, but just like the Terminator, it springs back to life among the misinformed.
Not a single penny of tax revenue has been lost to corporate tax avoidance, because corporations do not pay taxes, period.
Corporations merely collect and forward cash to the IRS. The actual payers of income tax are actual people: customers, employees, and owners.
One of the fundamental lessons of economics is that the entity who bears the statutory burden of paying any tax (filling out the tax forms and sending money to the IRS & other taxing authorities) isn't who actually bears the burden of the tax.
A bit more formally, EVERY tax on a business is borne by actual people - living, breathing, people - not by companies:
X% is borne by customers in the form of prices higher than they otherwise would be
Y% is borne by employees in the form of total compensation (and hours worked) lower than they otherwise would be
Z% is borne by business owners (shareholders) in the form of profits lower than they otherwise would be
...where X+Y+Z=1.0 (that is, X%+Y%+Z%=100.0%)
Quite literally, there is nowhere else for the tax to flow: it is always paid by real people.
Think of it this way: when you go to the grocery store & buy laundry soap, you pay sales tax at the register right?
Actually, you don't pay sales tax -- the grocery store is responsible for filling out sales tax forms & sending the forms plus money to the state/county/city. But of course you DO bear the burden of that sales tax even though you didn't fill out sales tax forms to forward to the state/county/city.
That grocery store is merely collecting & forwarding the sales tax. The same is true for ALL taxes levied on companies & businesses.
***
It varies by year, but total business income taxes paid to the IRS have been in the $250 Billion to $425 Billion range for quite some time. Those same businesses spend another $350 - $450 Billion on armies of tax accountants and tax lawyers just to fill out the paperwork & send a wire transfer to the IRS, and to plan for next year's income tax obligations. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/stat...revenue-source
The VP of Tax at a Fortune 500 company actually printed out their federal income tax form and brought it out on stage at a conference during a presentation as a prop. Well, he didn't personally bring it out - it came out on hand trucks. When set on stage and stacked, it was taller than the VP of Tax.
It is incredibly inefficient for businesses to spend $350-$450 Billion on armies of accountants to fill out the tax forms, when the actual burden of the income tax falls on people like you and me: customers, employees, and owners.
It would be far more efficient to eliminate corporate income tax altogether and raise the same amount of tax revenue by just taxing people directly. Raise income tax rates on people like me while eliminating income tax obligations altogether on corporations. It would eliminate the dead weight loss of those armies of tax accountants and tax attorneys. Those future unemployed tax accountants and tax attorneys could find other ways of putting food on the table: they could pursue exciting careers in the hospitality and food preparation industries.
Eliminate taxes on corporations but then tax shareholders. The government collects tax revenue to fund governmental activities, corporations do not waste money on convoluted tax planning, and shareholders are better off because earnings are taxed once and the companies they own are more efficient.
Everyone would be better off. Except for the future unemployed tax accountants and tax attorneys.
Last edited by moguldreamer; 12-20-2023 at 07:01 PM..
Do you understand that isn't cash on hand. That is the value of his businesses.
Oh, that really makes me feel sad for him. Because apparently he doesn't have enough real money in his checking account to pay for his houses, his yachts, his planes, his cars, his food, or even his taxes. Maybe he should go on welfare, since the only value he has is in his business. A business he obviously can't sell for billions of dollars. Unlike the rest of us rich people who have bundles and bundles of cash available right at hand.
Yeah, I understand all too well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer
<sigh.>
While you never had the opportunity to study economics at the University level, my hope is the following will resonate.
When high school or university Social Justice Club students start down the "income inequality" road, it sometimes is useful to make the issue tangible using real people.
Let's take the story of Elisha Graves Otis. Elisha Otis was born in Vermont in 1811, and was a master mechanic, having invented many safety devices and labor saving devices used in bedstead factories in the Northeast US. One such invention was what he named the "Safety Hoist" - it had an ingenious safety device that prevented it from falling if its lifting rope or chain broke. Lives that might be lost were saved.
He went out on his own, setting up shop in Yonkers, NY and sold the world's first Safety Freight Elevator Machine on September 20, 1853. To demonstrate just how safe it was, he installed a Safety Freight Elevator in NYC, famously riding in it up high and ordering a helper to CUT THE LIFT ROPE. He went on to patent independently controlled steam engines to raise and lower the Safety Elevator, and many more improvements as well.
Elisha Otis became a very wealthy man. So in the parlance of Income Inequality, by inventing what we now think of as modern elevators, Elisha Otis ADDED TO income inequality. After all, he was making money hand over fist while the other millions of Americans were plodding along with their lives as usual (most Americans were directly involved in agriculture at that time).
But although the wealth gap between this man, inventor Elisha Otis, and his customers was higher than it was before the invention, the customers got a product they valued that made their lives both better and easier. In economic terms, the wealth of these customers increased slightly while Otis' wealth increased greatly.
Is that increase in wealth inequality a problem? When I’ve asked not particularly bright high school students this question, most all agree it is not a problem. Ditto for Freshman Econ students. Graduate level Econ students are smart enough that they don't need this example to comprehend the issue.
You can substitute any prominent inventor into the anecdote with the same results. You could recount the story of Robert McCulloch who, in the 1940s, invented a light weight one-man chain-saw. Or you could examine Robert Noyce who invented the Integrated Circuit and co-founded Intel Corporation. Or Steve Wozniak & his partner Steve Jobs. Or Jeff Bezos. Or Mark Zuckerberg.
And you can substitute in small businesses who similarly add value, and large corporations who do as well - even when their innovation is something as simple-yet-hard as logistics rather than new product creation.
In each case, by virtue of innovation & execution, many inventors (and shareholders of companies) become wealthy - adding to income inequality and its cousin wealth inequality. In each case, customers were better off than they were before the invention.
In each case, despite an increase in "income inequality," everyone is better off. Even those not-particularly-bright high school students get it.
***
Rather than demonize the wealthy for the sin of having added value to society to earn their wealth (Otis, McCulloch, Wozniak & Jobs, Bezos, Musk, others), we should make their birthdays National Holidays.
Dude, when I see a helicopter in a tree, I don't have to be a pilot to know someone f*cked up royally.
I don't have to be an economist to know trickle down didn't work.
I don't have to be a stock market genius or invent something to know that our society has been and is increasingly becoming a country of haves and have-nots, and that when we lose the middle class, which is where we're headed like the Titanic to the ice berg, our country will be ripe for take over, riots in the street, or a revolution.
You can richsplain to me all you want. You can tell me examples from the past all you want. None of those have anything to do with what's happening NOW.
NOW is when corporate CEOs are being paid all out of all proportion to their employees. NOW is when companies are hiding their money in offshore accounts. NOW is when people can't afford to rent an apartment on minimum wage and NOW is when we have homeless people sleeping on sidewalks in tents on every city street in this country. NOW is when people can barely afford groceries.
You lecturing me on economics is...what? Useful? If I agree with what you say, how many people in this country will suddenly be able to fold up their tents and find an apartment to rent? What you say may be correct, but it doesn't mean a thing to those who are struggling to live. Great, you've explained bread and circuses. To what end? What will change for the better if we acknowledge your explanations?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye77
I'm sorry ma'am, but your peni$ envy is showing. For starters, $181k is Bezos' net worth, not his income. We tax income, not net worth. Secondly, Bezos/Musk/Gates/Zurkerberg/et al developed ideas that impact the life of virtually every living person. Get back to us when you have done something similar.
And if your income is 60k, you need to pay way more in taxes that you are currently paying, so that I can pay less or none.
ETA - Tax avoidance is perfectly legal, and is not tax evasion, which is not. Do you itemize your tax deductions or take the "standard deduction"? Both are forms of tax avoidance. Tsk, tsk. And as final comment, Warren Buffett has given away over $50 billion in the past few years. You?
No, YOUR penis envy is showing. You're hoping that by defending Bezos, you might one day be Bezos and you want to make damn sure no one can take your money if that happens.
I don't have to develop ideas that impact the life of every living person to be worth the value of a living person. Just because some of us didn't have opportunities to get rich doesn't mean our value as a person in this society is any less than that of someone like Bill Gates. If you think the poorest among us are worth the least, then why are you not advocating for death squads for the homeless? Or for those who are on welfare because they can't afford to live on what businesses pay? Or people on Social Security whose value has run out because they no longer work?
The IMPACT that rich CEOs make on living people is hogging more and more of the money, so less and less of it gets to those who need it to simply survive. Their IMPACT is buying and selling congressmen and senators so that laws can be made to allow them more loopholes to keep their money. Their IMPACT is making it impossible for the rest of us to have a job that will allow us to thrive, or pensions that will help us when we retire, unions that would stand behind the working man, and most of all, a more even chance of getting ahead instead of being trampled down when these people rush to make even more money.
Sorry, but I don't feel sorry for people who only have "net worth". Poor them. They must be so destitute. Maybe they need some food stamps to tide them over.
And by the way, when did Bezos or Pat Robertson ever give away 50 billion? When did you?
I don't itemize on my taxes or take a standard deduction because on Social Security, I don't have enough money coming in to even do taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMSRetired
Social Security comes from the FICA taxes, not corporate income taxes.
Hey, I'm old school. If you're a CEO, you need to declare taxes on your income just like everyone else. And if you and others own that business, then the value of that business needs to be taxed as well. Because if you're going to amass more and more money while simultaneously paying your workers less and less, those FICA taxes being collected just goes down.
You don't get to whine about how certain programs for the poor, disabled, and retired need to have cuts done to them while counting your piles of gold at the same time. I'm not saying you need to give it up and share it (although a revolution might make you do that). I'm saying that taxes should be equally levied on all of us, and they shouldn't disproportionately fall on just the people who make the money for the billionaires in this country. You think Bezos is paying anything towards FICA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
I don’t know if you are intentionally trying to mislead, or if you just don’t understand how all this works (and what you’re saying), but after the the outright falsehoods of this post, no one should pay any attention to anything else you have to say.
Yes, I know. Math is hard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo
So you mean the ultra rich - that is just 3 people - what you seem to want is confiscation not taxing - that is mostly done in 3rd world dictatorships.
Min wage is inconsequential - according to BLS, only about 0.17% currently work for min wages.
The rest seems like rants - again the rich already pay almost all taxes. The average american pays zero in net income tax - those above the average (top 50%) are paying 98% of the tax. The top 1% pay 42% of the tax and are paying an average of 26%, not 8%. The tax rate on investments is 23.6% - the "study" counts income that is not subject to tax (initial investment) to get that silly 8% figure - the data is also from when Obama was in office (2010 to 2018) before the Trump "tax cuts".
BTW - Qualify as a CEO if you want those salaries (and taxes associated).
And the stuff about Lear jets and churches is off the wall out of touch and is not at all related to SS. SS is paid as FICA by employers and employees, it does not come from income taxes. Your average church often has a hard time paying its clergy, let alone a yacht or a private plane. Maybe you don't know but IRS rules require clergy to pay their own FICA as self employed - they are not considered employees.
Bottom line, cut spending, not increasing taxes.
So you really think the Church of Scientology and the Mormons, who can spend $40 million trying to influence a vote in California, shouldn't be paying taxes. Let me restate that. Maybe what we need to do is make a law that says ANY church that does ANYTHING that involves politics, should get their tax-exemp status yanked. Oh, wait, we do have such a law. Then why the hell isn't it being enforced?
Taxes are not applied equally. Bezos can write off his super yacht. Elon Musk can write off his massive jet. But teachers can deduct only $250 in school supplies on their taxes. Now sellers on Etsy and eBay have to declare anything over $600 that they make in selling on those sites.
Know why?
Because the wealthy and well-connected buy and write our tax laws.
Real wages are lower today than they were in 1973. 80% or workers live paycheck to paycheck. Average workers make $54 a week less than they did 50 years ago adjusting for inflation. Productivity has doubled since 1980, but wages have only increased by half. 62% of jobs can't support a middle-class life. 140,000,000 Americans are either poor or low income. Half of older Americans have no retirement savings. We have more homeless than ever before. But corporate profits are at a 50 year high. Tell me again how these things aren't connected.
A CEO who makes $9.6 million a year (which is median CEO pay at large companies) and makes 4 restroom stops a day of a minute each in duration, makes 2.5 times as much annually as a minimum wage worker makes all year. And that doesn't count hand washing. Somehow when someone makes more money in a day peeing than a minimum wage worker makes in a year, calls to cut spending to programs like SS and food stamps don't go over very well.
Why is it easier to believe that 140,000,000 Americans are being lazy rather than that 400 Americans are being greedy?
Jeff Bezos does not work 130 billion times harder than I did and he's not 130 billion times smarter than I am. What he is is lucky and influential enough to get laws changed that favor his business.
If billionaries are worried about a wealth tax, then maybe they should get a second job, stop buying coffee and avocado toast, and pull themselves up by their bootstraps and do a better job of saving. Just sayin'.
Last edited by rodentraiser; 12-20-2023 at 06:49 PM..
Oh, that really makes me feel sad for him. Because apparently he doesn't have enough real money in his checking account to pay for his houses, his yachts, his planes, his cars, his food, or even his taxes. Maybe he should go on welfare, since the only value he has is in his business. A business he obviously can't sell for billions of dollars. Unlike the rest of us rich people who have bundles and bundles of cash available right at hand.
Yeah, I understand all too well.
Dude, when I see a helicopter in a tree, I don't have to be a pilot to know someone f*cked up royally.
I don't have to be an economist to know trickle down didn't work.
I don't have to be a stock market genius or invent something to know that our society has been and is increasingly becoming a country of haves and have-nots, and that when we lose the middle class, which is where we're headed like the Titanic to the ice berg, our country will be ripe for take over, riots in the street, or a revolution.
You can richsplain to me all you want. You can tell me examples from the past all you want. None of those have anything to do with what's happening NOW.
NOW is when corporate CEOs are being paid all out of all proportion to their employees. NOW is when companies are hiding their money in offshore accounts. NOW is when people can't afford to rent an apartment on minimum wage and NOW is when we have homeless people sleeping on sidewalks in tents on every city street in this country. NOW is when people can barely afford groceries.
You lecturing me on economics is...what? Useful? If I agree with what you say, how many people in this country will suddenly be able to fold up their tents and find an apartment to rent? What you say may be correct, but it doesn't mean a thing to those who are struggling to live. Great, you've explained bread and circuses. To what end? What will change for the better if we acknowledge your explanations?
No, YOUR penis envy is showing. You're hoping that by defending Bezos, you might one day be Bezos and you want to make damn sure no one can take your money if that happens.
I don't have to develop ideas that impact the life of every living person to be worth the value of a living person. Just because some of us didn't have opportunities to get rich doesn't mean our value as a person in this society is any less than that of someone like Bill Gates. If you think the poorest among us are worth the least, then why are you not advocating for death squads for the homeless? Or for those who are on welfare because they can't afford to live on what businesses pay? Or people on Social Security whose value has run out because they no longer work?
The IMPACT that rich CEOs make on living people is hogging more and more of the money, so less and less of it gets to those who need it to simply survive. Their IMPACT is buying and selling congressmen and senators so that laws can be made to allow them more loopholes to keep their money. Their IMPACT is making it impossible for the rest of us to have a job that will allow us to thrive, or pensions that will help us when we retire, unions that would stand behind the working man, and most of all, a more even chance of getting ahead instead of being trampled down when these people rush to make even more money.
Sorry, but I don't feel sorry for people who only have "net worth". Poor them. They must be so destitute. Maybe they need some food stamps to tide them over.
And by the way, when did Bezos or Pat Robertson ever give away 50 billion? When did you?
I don't itemize on my taxes or take a standard deduction because on Social Security, I don't have enough money coming in to even do taxes.
Hey, I'm old school. If you're a CEO, you need to declare taxes on your income just like everyone else. And if you and others own that business, then the value of that business needs to be taxed as well. Because if you're going to amass more and more money while simultaneously paying your workers less and less, those FICA taxes being collected just goes down.
You don't get to whine about how certain programs for the poor, disabled, and retired need to have cuts done to them while counting your piles of gold at the same time. I'm not saying you need to give it up and share it (although a revolution might make you do that). I'm saying that taxes should be equally levied on all of us, and they shouldn't disproportionately fall on just the people who make the money for the billionaires in this country. You think Bezos is paying anything towards FICA?
Yes, I know. Math is hard.
So you really think the Church of Scientology and the Mormons, who can spend $40 million trying to influence a vote in California, shouldn't be paying taxes. Let me restate that. Maybe what we need to do is make a law that says ANY church that does ANYTHING that involves politics, should get their tax-exemp status yanked. Oh, wait, we do have such a law. Then why the hell isn't it being enforced?
Taxes are not applied equally. Bezos can write off his super yacht. Elon Musk can write off his massive jet. But teachers can deduct only $250 in school supplies on their taxes. Now sellers on Etsy and eBay have to declare anything over $600 that they make in selling on those sites.
Know why?
Because the wealthy and well-connected buy and write our tax laws.
Real wages are lower today than they were in 1973. 80% or workers live paycheck to paycheck. Average workers make $54 a week less than they did 50 years ago adjusting for inflation. Productivity has doubled since 1980, but wages have only increased by half. 62% of jobs can't support a middle-class life. 140,000,000 Americans are either poor or low income. Half of older Americans have no retirement savings. We have more homeless than ever before. But corporate profits are at a 50 year high. Tell me again how these things aren't connected.
A CEO who makes $9.6 million a year (which is median CEO pay at large companies) and makes 4 restroom stops a day of a minute each in duration, makes 2.5 times as much annually as a minimum wage worker makes all year. And that doesn't count hand washing. Somehow when someone makes more money in a day peeing than a minimum wage worker makes in a year, calls to cut spending to programs like SS and food stamps don't go over very well.
Why is it easier to believe that 140,000,000 Americans are being lazy rather than that 400 Americans are being greedy?
Jeff Bezos does not work 130 billion times harder than I did and he's not 130 billion times smarter than I am. What he is is lucky and influential enough to get laws changed that favor his business.
If billionaries are worried about a wealth tax, then maybe they should get a second job, stop buying coffee and avocado toast, and pull themselves up by their bootstraps and do a better job of saving. Just sayin'.
People make their opportunities. How about the immigrants that come here not speaking a word of English but 5 years later they own 3 stores, and their kids are the valedictorian of their class? They made their own opportunities. It's all a question of priorities. I will never agree with penalizing success.
I don't have to be an economist to know trickle down didn't work.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." It is a straw man invented by progressives so as to have something to argue against.
The first known instance of the use of "trickle down" was by humorist Will Rodgers in the 1930s. It is not a theory of economics. Review the course catalog of every major research university in America and you will not find a single class of the form "Econ 206: Trickle Down Economics." Look at the faculty: you will never find someone labeled "The Goldman Sachs Distinguished Service Professor of Trickle Down Economics."
But thanks for playing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
I don't have to be a stock market genius or invent something to know that our society has been and is increasingly becoming a country of haves and have-nots, and that when we lose the middle class, which is where we're headed like the Titanic to the ice berg, our country will be ripe for take over, riots in the street, or a revolution.
Another progressive canard. EVERYONE - including you personally - is better off as a result of the efforts of the few who have made extraordinary contributions to mankind. I personally am named inventor on patents and technical innovations that I know with certainty are used in the device you personally use to type your post. You are able to communicate electronically with the broad world through your devices because of people like me.
You're welcome.
Beyond that, you make many mistakes in your analysis.
The standard of living of poor people is in no way impacted by the standard of living of wealthy people.
People with very low incomes have been movin' on up to lower-middle class.
People in the middle class have been movin' on up to the upper-middle class.
People in the upper-middle class have been movin' on up to the upper class. Etc.
The existence of financial affluence is a goal to many poor people. It gives them an economic incentive to make more money, and in doing so, they create and add value to society.
Finally, your assertion that the middle class is disapperaing is sort of correct - but for the very best of all possible reasons: everyone is becoming more affluent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
You can richsplain to me all you want.
While I can explain it to you, sadly, I cannot understand it for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
You can tell me examples from the past all you want. None of those have anything to do with what's happening NOW.
The standard of living of the USA is higher today than it was a decade ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
NOW is when corporate CEOs are being paid all out of all proportion to their employees.
Pay them zero, and your life - you, rodentraiser - your life will be worse off than it is today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
NOW is when companies are hiding their money in offshore accounts.
Factually incorrect: no business is hiding money, period.
But regardless, bring all their money back to the USA (in violation of the laws of all those other countries around the world) and your life - you, personally, rodentraiser - your life will be worse off than it is today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
NOW is when people can't afford to rent an apartment on minimum wage
That's a good thing. Gives people an incentive to make more money by, say, becoming tax accountants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
and NOW is when we have homeless people sleeping on sidewalks in tents on every city street in this country.
That's because cities want it this way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
NOW is when people can barely afford groceries.
There is no hunger in America, period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
You lecturing me on economics is...what? Useful?
In the triumph of hope over experience, I hope your becoming educated on this topic may become useful to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
If I agree with what you say, how many people in this country will suddenly be able to fold up their tents and find an apartment to rent? What you say may be correct, but it doesn't mean a thing to those who are struggling to live. Great, you've explained bread and circuses. To what end? What will change for the better if we acknowledge your explanations?
It is a matter of choice: people either can learn how to add more value to society and thereby earn more money - or (stay with me here) - they can decide not to add more value and not earn more money.
People make their opportunities. How about the immigrants that come here not speaking a word of English but 5 years later they own 3 stores, and their kids are the valedictorian of their class? They made their own opportunities. It's all a question of priorities. I will never agree with penalizing success.
People make excuse after excuse.
Very true: Successful people have stories of overcoming adversity. People who are failures list excuses.
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.
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.
