[JoJo Gunn]

No poor person ever gave me a job. Life ain't fair. Who "should" things be any different?

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

My first trip to the Brno institute of geophysics in
1971, was the first time I saw people who were smart,
educated and hard working and very poor.
My trip to Armenia later showed how under employed
people in a former communist country.
My driver was a mechanical engineer and my translator
was a physicist.

[MEG33]

If you study poverty ,you understand that we have richer poor in this country,we also have the extremely rich.I have never judged someone for being extremely wealthy...

Think how many people are working because of Walmart and ,despite the resentment about Chinese imports,all the money saved by the shoppers.

Without the wealth created by business owners,jobs would cease to exist.Viva la entrepreneur

[Igthorn]

Welcome to Free Republic - Keep coming back.

I'm a long time lurker and seldom post, but I couldn't resist commenting on this.

Name any country, nation or culture that has embraced redistribution of wealth and has continued to advance.

One thing well meaning socialists or communists always forget is that people will always be people. In a capitalist society greedy power hungry individuals tend to gravitate toward business as their way to power. In business you still have to satisfy your customers (sell a decent/needed product). In a government controlled society those greedy, power hungry people still exist - but government is their only road to power. Once in power there are no checks and balances.

One of the efforts to redistribute wealth here in the US is the estate tax - so called the millionaire tax. An estate valued at over 1 mil is subject to HEAVY taxes. Here in Ohio this is destroying family farms 260 acres, farm buildings, farm equipment may provide a reasonable income but if you try to leave it to your kids they are going to have to come up with a real hefty cash tax payment because of the value of the property.

[gracie1]

Yes, there are very rich people in this country. There are also very poor people. This is true in any country. Go to the most poverty stricken country on earth. I'll bet you the ruling elite live a lifestyle far above the common man, there is just less of them to enjoy what little wealth there is in that nation.

Now let's look at those described as living in poverty by the government here. Many of them live a comfortable life when compared to those living in poverty in other nations. Things like clean running water, public education, indoor plumbing, reliable food supply are nonexistent in some countries. Yes, there are those who live on the streets who lack all of these simple needs. But overall, I'd rather be poor in this country, then south America, Asia or Africa (BTW, I HAVE been poor!).

In many countries a person born into poverty has no opportunity to improve his life. He has no access to education or training to earn a better living. His only option is to somehow make his way into the power elite, usually the military.

In this country there is free public education, foodstamps, unemployment insurance, housing assistance, & medicaid. A person born into poverty has more of an opportunity to rise thru society then in many other countries. But you need to apply yourself, get good grades, stay away from addicting substances and other aspects of criminal life.

You are responsible for yourself. What you make of yourself depends on you. Blaming others only makes you a whiner. So what if some guy in New York is a billionaire. Taking his money and giving it to someone else is useless, because the person you are giving it to has no appreciation for it, as he did not have to earn it.

There are no guaranties in life.

[MeekOneGOP]

A hypothetical:

Let's say that all the wealth in the U.S. was divided equally amongst all U.S. citizens. Those that gained from this 'redistribution of wealth' would obviously be those that were the poorest. Those who gave the most would have been the richest, of course.

How many years before your percentages of the wealth distribution in the current period were back ? It would happen. There are some folks that are more driven to accumulate wealth than others are. You can bet that the majority of those that gained would squander theirs over time and those that had the majority of the wealth before would be back to where they were again.

The free market works best. Socialism, so tempting to so many, is a loser for ALL under the system except a select few at the top.

I'll take the Free Market System, thanks.

Oh ! Welcome to FreeRepublic.com, btw ...

[Freebird Forever]

At the same time, human resources staff for Wal-Mart, when they hire a new employee, will routinely complete paperwork for new hires to receive foodstamps, as the wages they pay their workers are so low that, even as full-time employees, they are assured of falling below the poverty level and qualifying for foodstamps, without which they wouldn't even be able to afford to feed their families.

Please cite your source & provide a link. The above sounds like Bravo Sierra.

Does this sort of thing not bother conservatives?

My first full time job paid $3.25 / hour. I desired a better lifestyle, so I improved my marketability through education, work experience and responsible decision making. If someone does not want to "plateau" at the starting Walmart wage, there are many avenues available to achieve their goals.

I've read studies which suggest that Americans by and large don't mind extremes of personal wealth

To covet the wealth / property of another is a nonproductive act. It wastes time and mental energy better spent on improving one's own lot.

this being the land of opportunity, we harbor some hope of one day rising to those lofty summits of affluence ourselves

The immigrant / emigrant ratio is highly skewed in favor of the former. Native-born Americans are not the only folks who aspire to a more affluent lifestyle. If someone doesn't believe that they can make a successful life in the US, it's a big world and there are boats, planes, etc. leaving every day.

so don't feel we should judge others for achieving that to which we ourselves aspire.

I don't believe anyone of meager means who (legally) elevates their standard of living should be adversely judged for doing so. They should be held up as role models for others who wish to emulate their success.

[MEG33]

Read Marx..I think you may like his ideas.

[workerbee]

the richest 2% of the country own 80% of the wealth in the US. That's honestly not just some liberal's opinion, that's really true, you can check the statistics yourself if you don't belive me. Flip that around and that means that the remaining 98% of us have only 20% to go around amongst all the rest of us.

Yeah, and the top 5% or so are also paying about 80+% of the taxes. That's honestly not just some conservative's opinion, that's really true, you can check the statistics yourself if you don't believe me. Flip that around and that means that the remaining 95% or more aren't paying very much for the myriad services and handouts they receive.

Does this sort of thing not bother liberals?

[Hank Rearden]

Look at it this way: when's the last time a bum with no money offered to hire you?

[grellis]

At the same time, human resources staff for Wal-Mart, when they hire a new employee, will routinely complete paperwork for new hires to receive foodstamps, as the wages they pay their workers are so low that, even as full-time employees, they are assured of falling below the poverty level and qualifying for foodstamps, without which they wouldn't even be able to afford to feed their families.

Misleading. I know the same is done at Target and my bet is that the same is being done AS A SERVICE by many other employers. At Target, new hires are routinely informed of programs available to low-income families so they can have health coverage until they are eligible for the company's health package after their 90 day probationary period.

[Scenic Sounds]

I am a graduate student in political science and would honestly like to hear the views of conservative thinkers on a point which has been troubling me with respect to the direction our country is heading, namely the widening gap between rich people and poor people.

I think when you're all done beating yourself up on these issues, you will find that some disparity in incomes is important for creating incentives and that an excessive disparity in incomes can lead to instability, revolution, etc.

BTW, when studying the issue, be sure to distinguish between disparities in income and disparities in wealth - they are two different issues. And google "Lorenz curve" for lots of great links. ;-)

[SaveTheChief]

I was called "simplistic" yesterday when responding in another thread, so with that out of the way, I want to weigh in.

We live in a capitalist society that has done well for us since our founding. Those who choose to make a deal out of the rich, and the inequity of people's living conditions, are not looking at the big picture in my opinion.

The truth about our economic structure is that everyone who comes to this country and has inspiration, a good work ethic, and will take the risk to do something better with his life, will have the opportunity to earn money and provide for the future for himself and his family. Hard work is rewarded by good pay. If a person does not like his job, he has the freedom to try and better himself through education and a better job. No one in our society is stuck. There are many possibilities and many opportunities for those who really want them.

This is money which is hard-earned, and well deserved. Income tax in its current form is a socialist scheme. It is designed to punish those who earn more by taking more and more money away from those who have worked to earn it themselves. If this money was only being used on programs all Americans can use, like defense, national infrastructure and etc., then it would be easier to stomach. In reality, these monies are also being used to pay for welfare and a host of other pork projects used to reward those who sit at home and do nothing but have more babies to take more from the system. Of course, I have mentioned only one of several examples, but I hope I have made my point.

Those desiring to spread the wealth by making everyone "equal" are nothing more than socialists. By nature, Socialism does nothing but reward those who have grasped power, while fostering an environment in which there is no hope, no reward, and no incentive for doing groundbreaking work to move the society and economy forward.

Take it all with a grain of salt. This is only how I see things.

[TexasCajun]

I am an achiever and producer for myself and my family, why should me and others like me support consumer non-producers?

Achievers will always have more then non-producers just because of their character and work ethic, that is if the government allows us to be free to do so.

[SaveTheChief]

By the way, have you any links or sources to back up the statistics you quoted? This would help your credibility as far as I am concerned.

[RightWhale]

the richest 2% of the country own 80% of the wealth in the US.

46% of the 'poor' own their own home. 87% own a color TV. Poverty is an income of less than $1000 per month, and welfare pays more than that. Education is free. The entire staff at McDonalds turns over every month. In other words, there is a problem, but rich versus poor isn't it.

[Political Junkie Too]

The idea of America is to offer equal opportunity, not equal outcome.

-PJ

[TexasCajun]

I take it your liberal professors have brainwashed you into becoming a socialist and communist?

I recommend a healthy dose of FreeRepulic taken 3 times a day until your brain is cleansed.

[Jim Noble]

would honestly like to hear the views of conservative thinkers on a point which has been troubling me with respect to the direction our country is heading, namely the widening gap between rich people and poor people

Well, before sharing my views, it would help if you could explain why this bothers you.

In a just society, you should get what you deserve, no?

Do you have an intellectual basis or theory that would justify an opinion that rich people, as a class, do not deserve what they get?

If so, what is it?

[xusafflyer]

One book for you:

Atlas Shrugged