Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ZenWarrior who wrote (149568)	5/30/2001 10:19:03 AM
From: SecularBull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You apparently assign little if any credit to successful people in our system for their achievements. It is all heaped on them at the expense of the "losers", and they owe it to society to make amends for that good fortune. I think you and I have an irreconcilable difference on this point. ~SB~

To: ZenWarrior who wrote (149568)	5/30/2001 10:40:04 AM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

How does making $10 mill a year make other folks losers? Fella, it takes a heck of a lotta spending to pull down that kinda cash. And it takes a dang lot to keep it. You don't just pull down $10 mill and then put it under the dang mattress. I don't owe no dang body a friggin' penny! DANG THIS MAKES ME SO DANGED TICKED!!!!! These "losers" of yours don't have a right to HALF of anybody's income.

To: ZenWarrior who wrote (149568)	5/30/2001 10:51:01 AM
From: RON BL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

If you believe that then why not change the salary structure? When you give back to the government your just transferring the money to people who haven't earned it and haven't a clue how to organize it. What charity organization would be allowed that spends 96 cents on the dollar for itself? Yet the food stamp program does. Perhaps you forget that failed business model that said let the state redistribute the wealth. That failed model was and is communism. We spend over 50 billion dollars a year just trying to comply with the tax system. Do you not realize what a drain to the economy that is? To put it blunt we can demand that the private sector make year over year 5 to 12 % improvements but we cannot expect that the government just once in a decade spend less or organize itself to be efficient. I'm not even talking about ending social programs just running them so that the benefits go to the people who need it not into a black hole. Get your head out of the brain washing you received in your years of school grow up and think independently for a change

To: ZenWarrior who wrote (149568)	5/30/2001 10:53:46 AM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Interesting point. The way I read your post, the people who are "free" to succeed are responsible not only for themselves, but for the people who do not succeed. Therefore (and correct me if I am wrong) people who are "free" to fail are not responsible for their failure. It's nice that you're going to give 5 million dollars of your own money to people you don't know. I have a feeling that you might possibly change your mind on that point once you had actually earned the 5 million...but I won't argue it with you. Your argument seems to be that if I "win" at the game, I have done so at the expense of someone else who has to "lose" so I can "win", and that therefore by "winning", I have some debt or obligation to the "loser" because I would not have won had he not lost. Sorry. It won't wash. There are people like that, I agree. But I'm not one of them. With all due respect, and I know you are an intelligent person, would it not be wiser to start out with the assumption that all people are created equal, and that all of them can win if they have the opportunity? You're assuming that under certain circumstances, an individual (by whatever definition you choose to give) cannot possibly succeed. That necessitates the assumption that there are barriers that said individual cannot possibly overcome. I don't buy that. That is what I call "oppression". I don't disagree that some people will "fail". You and I have a distinct difference on why they fail, and what should be done to avoid their continuing "failure" in the future. You believe that if I am a "loser" that there is so little hope for me that I will cease to exist if somebody doesn't don't hold me up until I die. I believe that if I am a "loser" (and I have been one, be assured of that) that the only person that is going to get me out of the hole I dug for myself is me. If I manage to do it, then I'm a "winner". Although I should be free to help anyone I choose to help, I don't exactly see how that obligates me to give half of my money to someone who isn't interested in doing what I did. That seems more to me like I am rewarding someone for failing. Sorry. I don't buy it. I worked for the dough. I'm going to do what I choose with it.

To: ZenWarrior who wrote (149568)	5/30/2001 9:10:38 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 769670

In a just world, Sir, you be in prison. You are a thief at heart. You regard wealth that belongs to other people as really being wealth that was somehow stolen from you. Irresponsible? How can you use the word "irresponsible" to describe someone who works long years and long hours to build a company? Why do not use that word to describe someone begging on the sidewalk outside a store with a "Help Wanted" ad in the window? Doesn't happen? I beg to differ. Inhumane? These people provide the jobs that make life humane for those who will take advantage of their opportunities. Can't be done? This country abounds in stories of men and women who started life in direst poverty and ended their lives in mansions.