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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (110050)	11/28/2007 12:49:18 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

i didn't say there was no correlation. it isn't direct. hard work isn't even the major factor - good luck is. ask a blind person who can't sing. so, you support the wealthy (mostly through dumb luck - intelligence is highly genetic) getting wealthier while everyone else kisses up. fine. i disagree. there is no inconsistency. "meeting personal values" is so vague as to be in the realm of worthless. he supports giving back to the society (through taxes or charities) that made him wealthy. he did just that. that's totally consistent. just b/c others are more self centered and selfish than warren doesn't make him inconsistent. you seem to be saying warren would leave all that money to his children if the tax code were different - you just contradicted yourself. if the tax code is making buffet change how he disperses his money then it doesn't, by definition, support his core values. you can't have it both ways. you think luck and good fortune is BS b/c your eyes aren't wide open and you think too highly of yourself. if you were born in south africa as an orphaned child whose parents died of aids in an impoverished village... oh, yeah, luckily you weren't. luckily... luckily... luckily... guess what the key word is. there is a kid there who is in that situation who is wondering why he was so unlucky. funny thing - if fate had it that you were that kid, you'd feel unlucky, too. it is called situational values... your values change with your circumstance. i, on the other hand, am consistent. if i was the poor kid, i'd feel unlucky (b/c i would be). i'm not and i feel very fortunate and luck (b/c i am). but you just argued the tax system changed his behavior... so it can't really work for him, right? if the system truly supported his values, it wouldn't force him to change his behavior. look, the government needs to exist. we agree that government is a mess, but not having it is worse - you'd have to learn another language once we were taken over and enslaved. it is reasonable for the wealthy to shoulder at least as much of the cost burden of government as they own in assets - ie, if they own 5% of america's wealth, they should at least pay 5% of the government upkeep (whatever that is). they don't. imho, they should pay about double... but getting them up to par would be a good start.