View Single Post
  #213  
Old 09-05-2019, 09:16 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
Hey, you finally answered a question. Congratulations and thank you. No I was not familiar with that Simpson's clip.



And now you're going back to vagaries and avoiding a discussion of the implications of a wealth tax. Is the liberal position that rich people should be forced to sell property or shares in order to pay a wealth tax on paper profits? If someone starts a business or invests in a business, and they're lucky enough for that business to be hugely successful such that their paper wealth crosses the "wealthy" threshold, should they be allowed to keep their stake in the business until they're ready to sell, or should they be forced to sell a portion of their stake in the business in order to pay a wealth tax? It's not a question about Jeff Bezos and Amazon. It's a question directly to the OP's subject on understanding the liberal position on wealth.
Vagaries? What is clear is that you go for muddling the waters, you do not like the OP and yet it is clear about what he means about the difference between the rich and the wealthy. I'm going for the same definitions as per the parameters from the OP.

Besides memes you are still grossly missing about how time gets into this too, the wealthy, as per the OP, are the ones that got to be wealthy thanks to life's lottery, as being born into wealth. Society's needs that grow when wealth stagnates thanks to the whims of wealthy people that hoard the riches of others can not be ignored.

https://fablesofaesop.com/the-miser-and-his-gold.html

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-05-2019 at 09:18 AM.