Designer Computer Bags

Why don't people realize this about wealth redistribution?

If we redistributed the wealth there would be no reason for anyone to do the important jobs like doctors or computer designers. If I were to make the same money as everyone else I would bag groceries instead of becoming an engineer. Also the people who work with you that produce less and are lazy will get the same money. Plus Steve Jobs would not have invented the Ipod because he would never have been rewarded for it, or Henry Ford would not have started Ford. Why cant people see while it seems like a nice theory it would never work in real life. scott is is not up to you to decide who helps who. If you force people to help others that is tryanny

Public Comments

1. "Redistribution of Wealth" is not what you seem to think it is. That phrase has really lost its meaning, through fear tactics and misinformation. Nobody has ever proposed taking away rich peoples money, and giving it all to the poor people, so that everybody will be even in society. Nor will highly specialized jobs pay the same as manual labor jobs. It basically means that wealthy people have more of a responsibility to take care of the less-able members of society that cannot take care of themselves (such as the elderly, disabled, or extremely poverty-stricken). That's all.
2. what about people doing what they like to do????? what about pride? The average starting salary of a scientist is about that of a school teacher.. after doing an additional 3-6 years of schooling after a bachelors degree.. for those without the years of schooling (in process of the PhD) its about minimum wage (a lot thanks to cuts in the sciences a la Bush and taxed heavily a la Reagan ) BUT they do it anyways... WHY???? some are motived not by $$$$ but because they love to do it. Oh yeah.. BTW.. nobody is advocating your crazy scheme. Nobody wants it redistributed like that.. we tend to think people shouldnt be billionaires by disenfranchising normal people (ie bankers, oil executives, insurance executives)
3. Since 1980, programs were created to redistribute the wealth from the poor to the rich. During that time, real gdp increased by 66% but the middle class only saw increases in real income of 14% (all of that occurred under Clinton), the poorest 25% saw a decrease of 4%, and the richest 1% saw an increase of real income of 250%. It is about time that programs are created to redistribute wealth in the opposite direction.
4. To me personally it's not about the redistribution of wealth. You earn it you keep it. But by the same token if you make decisions that devastate peoples lives or the financial stability of the country. You should in turn be held accountable. Perhaps a law or laws that would do just that. Keep your huge bonus' but create havoc and have all you've earned seized. Home, property, cars, boats, planes. if it's yours then it gets forfeited. Without stiff penalties for playing fast and loose with other peoples money we're doomed to another financial crisis. Can you imagine how much worse the economic meltdown would have been if privatization of social security had gone through? Who would have benefited from the privatization? None other than the financial sector that brought us the meltdown. You and others call it redistribution of wealth. I like to call it redistribution of power. Put the power back into the hands of the people. The ones that actually create the need, which in turn creates the supply, which in turn creates the jobs that create more demand. This notion that only those with wealth can create jobs. Is nothing more than a snow job itself. Have a nice day.
5. Exactly...it doesn't work in real life. Of all the countries in the world, America got to be #1 because we DIDN'T redistribute the wealth. The best and brightest came here to engage in the great risk/reward system we created, and now we're trying to destroy that system because we feel guilty that not everyone is filthy rich. It's pretty sick
6. I have been reported for posting this link in the past. I guess its simple enough for the Libs to understand http://www.thatssaulfolks.com/2009/12/20/a-lesson-in-obama-economics/
7. People who think they way you do NEVER become doctors, engineers or scientists under any system. Nobody who has the basic mentality of a doctor, engineer or scientist would ever be content bagging groceries. I speak from personal knowledge. I've been an engineer for a long time, and money is only a small part of what motivates us. Most engineers tinker with technical things on their own time, because for us, it's fun. Scientists are the same. You don't have to pay them to think about science. They do that for free. But to get work out of them that's useful to other people, you may have to pay them. But there are many forms of pay that a society can use to reward doctors, engineers and scientists. Prestige is an extremely effective motivator.
8. No one seems to ever bring up the moral issues associated with redistribution. Taking from one to give to another without consent is called theft. This is true on the societal level as well as the individual level. Several hundred million people saying its ok does not make it so, You claim the end result justifies the use of immoral means? You should re-examine your desired end. Its this kind of "exception ethics" that has almost destroyed the greatest country to exist.