Overly greedy rich elite

evo2000

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

Timberrrrrrrr

evo2000 wrote: »

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

And how would you do this? Do you think it's stuffed under the mattress?

pmasterson95

Ah ya but sure all poor are scrounging scumbags. **** them.

Links234

That's only because they worked 3.5billion times harder, don't you know?

Canadel

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And how would you do this?

Tacks.

the evasion_kid

There seems to be a growing divide between the haves and have nots.

The Backwards Man

You're richer than two billion people on the planet OP, why don't you go first?

daRobot

Have you considered presenting your findings to the IMF? You might well be onto something.

Valetta

If you took all the wealth in the world and divided it equally between all the population, within a few months you would have the same divide between rich and poor.

Some would gamble their money away.
Some would squander it on consumables.
Others would set up businesses to service the wants of the first two groups.

DivingDuck

evo2000 wrote: »

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

Only if we should also take the device you used to post this and sell it to do something good with it.

IMO, the real greed problem is people who have more than enough to survive (and the reality is that the vast majority of people who have the time and resources to post here fall into that category) are happy to complain about others who have more, while holding onto what they themselves have above and beyond what's needed.

Most of us here are greedy rich compared to people in the developing (or entirely undeveloped, in some cases) world. Until we divest ourselves of our extras in service of the needy, we really have no business telling others what to do with theirs.

DEFTLEFTHAND

High achievers, we should all aspire to be like these men.

wakka12

No..they own it. You have no right to take it away just because poor people exist. You're richer than lots of people, should we take some of the extra money you have and give it to people slightly poorer, just because.
Thats communism, and as you can see it doesn't really work.

NachoBusiness

I tried but Bono just loafed me in the chest.

Fleawuss

Valetta wrote: »

If you took all the wealth in the world and divided it equally between all the population, within a few months you would have the same divide between rich and poor.

Some would gamble their money away.
Some would squander it on consumables.
Others would set up businesses to service the wants of the first two groups.

And the really wealthy would make their money buying and selling money itself. And rigging the system so they could get away with it.

evo2000

evo2000 wrote: »

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

Touch one cent of MY money and you'll feel the force of my wrath.

Canadel

wakka12 wrote: »

No..they own it. You have no right to take it away just because poor people exist. You're richer than lots of people, should we take some of the extra money you have and give it to people slightly poorer, just because.
Thats communism, and as you can see it doesn't really work.

Money ain't got no owners, only spenders..

Anyway, it's not a question of taking money away from the super rich simply because poor people exist - it's taking money away from the super rich (through taxing their wealth accordingly) because it does not make sense for that amount of wealth to be so concentrated.

walshyn93

the evasion_kid wrote: »

There seems to be a growing divide between the haves and have nots.

Since when are the billionaires the "haves"? The majority of the population of Ireland is a "have". A significant majority, in fact.

riclad

Maybe its time to clamp down on tax shelters,
in the eu.
EG company x sets up small office in luxembourg ,
all the company s profits go through there ,
so they pay 1 per cent tax instead of 20 per tax in the uk.
The luxembourg tax shelter was set up about 10 years ago by
a high level eu official.
There,s all sorts of tax allowances the rich use to reduce their tax bill.
IF governments team up they could reduce this tax evasion.
I,m aware some US companys reduce corporation tax by opening an office in ireland.
IN the usa big corporations lobby politicial partys for extra tax breaks
all the time.

strelok

Canadel wrote: »

Money ain't got no owners, only spenders..

Anyway, it's not a question of taking money away from the super rich simply because poor people exist - it's taking money away from the super rich (through taxing their wealth accordingly) because it does not make sense for that amount of wealth to be so concentrated.

the wealth isn't concentrated, it's all over the world being used for all sorts of things benefiting all sorts of people

my life is in no way made poorer by someone else being richer, comrade.

evo2000

evo2000 wrote: »

with that said, should we not just take the money off these people?

Those damn greedy people, I want all their money, it's not greed when *I* want it

http://www.political-humor.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/i-have-never-understood-why-it-is-greed-to-want-to-keep-the-money-you-have-earned-but-not-greed-to-want-to-take-somebody-elses-money.jpg

The_Valeyard

3.5 billion vs 85, I think we can take them.


If there was hope, it MUST lie in the proles.
-George Orwell, 1984.

KomradeBishop

You don't actually need to take the money off of anyone, just fix the actual banking/economic system, so that central banks do 'QE for the People' (central banks hitting inflation targets, by putting money into public investment) instead of 'QE for the Wealthy/Financial-Sector' (central banks failing to hit inflation targets, by pissing money at the wealthy and banking/finance sector, making them even more rich).

Even people like Draghi are implicitly suggesting this change now:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=97317404#post97317404

Money is like manure; spread it around and it will do some good, but, pile it up (in 85 heaps) and it'll stink to hell and back.
Don't forget that much of that "money" (from QE money printing) is nothing more than faith based valuations of bonds & shares, all it takes is another financial crisis and POOOOF!!! it's gone!

ThisRegard

evo2000 wrote: »

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

Why? If people earn such money through their own decisions in life, why should other people benefit from their money? Most of these people employ others and give to charity anyway.

steddyeddy

Valetta wrote: »

If you took all the wealth in the world and divided it equally between all the population, within a few months you would have the same divide between rich and poor.

Some would gamble their money away.
Some would squander it on consumables.
Others would set up businesses to service the wants of the first two groups.

True but these individuals would not be the same rich and the same poor. Individuals are often rich through wealth and opportunity hoarding.

questionmark?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Money is like manure; spread it around and it will do some good, but, pile it up (in 85 heaps) and it'll stink to hell and back.
Don't forget that much of that "money" (from QE money printing) is nothing more than faith based valuations of bonds & shares, all it takes is another financial crisis and POOOOF!!! it's gone!

Damn right. Majority of it is just made up. Just look at how much real hard cash a bank actually needs to have in order to lend 'money' out!

Herb Powell

EAT THE RICH

The_Valeyard

Herb Powell wrote: »

EAT THE RICH

Ewwwww, too fatty.

evo2000

Look at all the rich on here defending there own! greed!

When you defend people that horde away most of the worlds wealth needlessly it says alot about the type of person u are.

If i had a ridculous amount of money sitting there id give away the vast majority of it, and still be rich as **** its just pure greed nothing less!

eeguy

evo2000 wrote: »

Look at all the rich on here defending there own! greed!

When you defend people that horde away most of the worlds wealth needlessly it says alot about the type of person u are.

If i had a ridculous amount of money sitting there id give away the vast majority of it, and still be rich as **** its just pure greed nothing less!

And sure enough there's plenty of refugees and poor who'd say the same about you.

Wy don't you lead by example and donate 20% of your income?

evo2000

eeguy wrote: »

And sure enough there's plenty of refugees and poor who'd say the same about you.

Wy don't you lead by example and donate 20% of your income?

Cause i cant afford too, i need what i have to get by

Now say i had a billion times the amount i needed to get by id happily help them out.

I wouldnt horde it greedily

evo2000

DivingDuck wrote: »

Only if we should also take the device you used to post this and sell it to do something good with it.

IMO, the real greed problem is people who have more than enough to survive (and the reality is that the vast majority of people who have the time and resources to post here fall into that category) are happy to complain about others who have more, while holding onto what they themselves have above and beyond what's needed.

Most of us here are greedy rich compared to people in the developing (or entirely undeveloped, in some cases) world. Until we divest ourselves of our extras in service of the needy, we really have no business telling others what to do with theirs.

Yeah... you see theres a small bit of a differnce between the bloke thats earning 200 more than he needs and buys nice things and the lad that has a look at his bank account as sees billions,

When 85 people have have billions, some even trillions... thats abit of an issue dont you think? perhaps slightly greedy even...

Or maybe they need that to survive who knows!

Herb Powell

eeguy wrote: »

And sure enough there's plenty of refugees and poor who'd say the same about you.

Wy don't you lead by example and donate 20% of your income?

I see this being said a few times in the thread, and I while I get the point ye're making, it's kind of nonsense.

Cost of living varies from country to country, but not even the most ardent capitalist could tell me with a straight face that anyone needs billions, or even millions upon millions.

There's a certain level of wealth where it's just a game, and a fairly tasteless one at that. Because really wtf is the point?

I suppose everyone has their thing that they're into, I personally find people who are into money to be obnoxious, generally.

MilesMorales1

Capitalism stinks OP. What can ya do. Lots of people seem keen to tell us how bad it is, yet not one of them has a viable alternative.

A Primal Nut

evo2000 wrote: »

World's 85 richest individuals have as much money as 3.5billion poorest... with that said, should we not just take the money off these people? and do something good with it, its kinda ridiculous that there are 85 people strolling around with that much money while others starve im not saying take it all maybe like 90% or something they d still be rich just not greedy rich.

So then none of these 3.5 billion people would work; thus productivity would collapse and the price of goods + services would go way up; all that would happen is instead of 3.5 billion poor people there would be 7 billion poor people - so yes you would have equality but not a good equality (see any communist country).

One eyed Jack

evo2000 wrote: »

Cause i cant afford too, i need what i have to get by

Now say i had a billion times the amount i needed to get by id happily help them out.

Why would you expect billionaires shouldn't be allowed to say the same thing?

I wouldnt horde it greedily

Except that's exactly what you're doing by the standards of someone who is less wealthy than you are, a homeless person for example. As far as they're concerned, if you're not giving them your money, you're hoarding it greedily.

It's always easier to tell other people how they should spend their money, it's much harder to lead by example and part with your own.

riffmongous

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Why would you expect billionaires shouldn't be allowed to say the same thing?

Well if those 85 people need all that money just to survive how do the other 3.5 billion manage?

I dont care if someone is rich, or super rich but there is a point when it becomes dangerous to have so much wealth concentrated in the hands of a few people

The Corinthian

evo2000 wrote: »

Cause i cant afford too, i need what i have to get by

Funny how it's always the one's 'unable' to sacrifice that are always asking others to do so for them.

What people should be concerned about is not equality of wealth, but equality of opportunity.

One eyed Jack

riffmongous wrote: »

Well if those 85 people need all that money just to survive how do the other 3.5 billion manage?

I don't think the 85 people particularly care how the other 7 billion people manage, let alone half that. Why should they have to? They have concerns of their own, and it's very easy for those with no money, to be able to advise those with money, how they should spend their money. Those 85 people didn't accumulate their wealth through sheer stupidity, and they may not share anyone else's particular altruism from a place where the reality is that those people don't have their wealth, and will never have their wealth, because by their own admission they'd give it away.

At what point do you suggest people have enough money and they should start giving away any excess money they earn?

I dont care if someone is rich, or super rich but there is a point when it becomes dangerous to have so much wealth concentrated in the hands of a few people

I imagine they feel the same way about the poor and the super poor. Why should they feel any differently? They owe society nothing, and it would become even more dangerous for society if those 85 people were simply to redistribute their wealth among the poor and the super poor in society. It just wouldn't work.

ygolometsipe

evo2000 wrote: »

should we not just take the money off these people?

You can try and take my money if you like but I can buy
a bigger gun and more bullets.

War's cost money

evo2000

The Corinthian wrote: »

Funny how it's always the one's 'unable' to sacrifice that are always asking others to do so for them.

What people should be concerned about is not equality of wealth, but equality of opportunity.

Imagine the trillionair sacrificing so much such a brave soul he gave away so much and now he only has billions left... we should commend such heroes

85 people hoarding away the majority of the worlds wealth is a different story whether u like to admit it or not there is something wrong there.

what you are saying is laughable, i donate money to local charity's and volunteer but unfortunately im unable to end world hunger or sustain a small country with my income sorry to disappoint u i guess i shouldnt have an opinion till i can.

But by all means continue to defend the greedy says alot about who u are when u see nothing wrong with the situation.

Bubbaclaus

Why do people think that these people have billions just lying around in their bank accounts doing nothing? They don't.

Bubbaclaus

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Why do people think that these people have billions just lying around in their bank accounts doing nothing? They don't.

They're like dragons and they sit on their piles of gold laughing at the peasants

DivingDuck

evo2000 wrote: »

Yeah... you see theres a small bit of a differnce between the bloke thats earning 200 more than he needs and buys nice things and the lad that has a look at his bank account as sees billions,

When 85 people have have billions, some even trillions... thats abit of an issue dont you think? perhaps slightly greedy even...

Or maybe they need that to survive who knows!

I certainly see a difference, as you do. But I believe that's because we're part of the lucky group.

I suspect someone who is a part of the unlucky group --someone doesn't have food, shelter, or clean water-- might struggle to perceive that difference, however.

50c of that €200 you mention could mean the difference between life and death to someone like that. Doesn't that make it just as wrong of you to hold onto it, proportionally, as it is for the uber wealthy to hold onto their millions?

evo2000

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Why do people think that these people have billions just lying around in their bank accounts doing nothing? They don't.

Whos to say they arent using that power and wealth to profit even more off the backs of the poor? yano keep them poor and use the cheap labour to make more money ?! :rolleyes:

evo2000

Tradesurplus wrote: »

If they earned it legally I don't see the problem.

you dont see the problem with that ? are you serious?

evo2000

The people here defending it would be the type of people that if there neighbors were starving and they had way too much food they would rather let them starve because its there right to have food as much of it as they like! and theres absoutlely nothing wrong with it, what about whats morally right?

Canadel

strelok wrote: »

But by all means continue to defend the greedy says alot about who u are when u see nothing wrong with the situation.

Indeed. It's a silly attitude as much as it is one of servitude. There is nothing anti-capitalist or anti-democratic about suggesting that taxes be increased on those earning in the billions to prevent situations where 85 people control such a percentage of the world's wealth. It's common sense and fairness, but the usual suspects will twist it to make it seem like the silly socialists want to take their money and punish those who succeed in business etc.

Bubbaclaus

evo2000 wrote: »

Whos to say they arent using that power and wealth to profit even more off the backs of the poor? yano keep them poor and use the cheap labour to make more money ?! :rolleyes:

What?

Bubbaclaus

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Why do people think that these people have billions just lying around in their bank accounts doing nothing? They don't.

Correct! They have stocks, bonds & shares worth billions of virtual money lying around their bank deposit boxes, plus the luxury of being able to be first in line for payment if the business or country goes bust! This means that they take ownership of an airport or something of similar value, look at what has just happened in Greece. These people become richer (in a real sense) in the world of "winner takes all" financial management.

evo2000

DivingDuck wrote: »

I certainly see a difference, as you do. But I believe that's because we're part of the lucky group.

I suspect someone who is a part of the unlucky group --someone doesn't have food, shelter, or clean water-- might struggle to perceive that difference, however.

50c of that €200 you mention could mean the difference between life and death to someone like that. Doesn't that make it just as wrong of you to hold onto it, proportionally, as it is for the uber wealthy to hold onto their millions?

But its not proportional, you are talking about a 50c donation to the ability to wipe out world hunger?

Regardless tho 85 people having that much power and wealth is ridiculous you cant justify someone sitting on that much money, sure people say they are doing stuff with it but at the end of the day they are still sitting on billions.

Its legally right but morally wrong.