Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 93

Thread: Bicep size & belief systems page 2

  1. #11
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn View Post
    Socialism/Communism

    Using the state to force people to give up their wealth so it can be given to those that the state decides to.
    Which means that when poor people pay a much higher tax rate than the wealthy, so that the wealthy not only pay little or none but get direct subsidies, we have socialism/communism?

    The flow of money is a two way street.

  2. #12
    kenn's Avatar
    kenn is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    Which means that when poor people pay a much higher tax rate than the wealthy, so that the wealthy not only pay little or none but get direct subsidies, we have socialism/communism?

    The flow of money is a two way street.
    What?
    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
    Current Weight: 235 pounds
    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

  3. #13
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn View Post
    What?
    Yep. Wealth can redistribute in either direction. And does.

  4. #14
    kenn's Avatar
    kenn is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    Yep. Wealth can redistribute in either direction. And does.
    Except your subtopic has no bearing on the topic of the thread. But I'll bite, where does your above situation exist in a developed country?

    How does wealth redistribution mean anything other than the generally accepted meaning that I posted?
    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
    Current Weight: 235 pounds
    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

  5. #15
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn View Post
    Except your subtopic has no bearing on the topic of the thread. But I'll bite, where does your above situation exist in a developed country?

    How does wealth redistribution mean anything other than the generally accepted meaning that I posted?
    Your meaning is not the "generally accepted meaning". The word "redistribution" is neutral in direction. All taxes are redistributive in nature. They never go back 100% to the person who paid them.

    But why should I have to give you examples of wealthy people paying no taxes PLUS getting subsidies from the government right here in the US, when it's been in the news regularly for years?

    You were the one who brought up redistribution of wealth.

  6. #16
    kenn's Avatar
    kenn is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    Your meaning is not the "generally accepted meaning". The word "redistribution" is neutral in direction. All taxes are redistributive in nature. They never go back 100% to the person who paid them.

    But why should I have to give you examples of wealthy people paying no taxes PLUS getting subsidies from the government right here in the US, when it's been in the news regularly for years?
    The phrase is generally accepted in American lexicon. As for all taxes being redistributive, that's quite simply not true. It's as if you're trying to muddle the definition rather than admit you're wrong. The phrase wealth distribution is what we're discussing not distribution in general.

    Because you made the claim, so yes you have to back it up. Your actual claim was that the poor pay more in than the wealthy. Both vague terms, however, ill let you define for the purpose of discussion.
    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
    Current Weight: 235 pounds
    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

  7. #17
    fifer's Avatar
    fifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Fife, Scotland
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn View Post
    The phrase is generally accepted in American lexicon. As for all taxes being redistributive, that's quite simply not true. It's as if you're trying to muddle the definition rather than admit you're wrong. The phrase wealth distribution is what we're discussing not distribution in general.

    Because you made the claim, so yes you have to back it up. Your actual claim was that the poor pay more in than the wealthy. Both vague terms, however, ill let you define for the purpose of discussion.
    I don't know about in the US, but here in the UK and generally in Europe, there is a well established system of income taxes on working people, which is redistributed both to unemployed people (over half of which is in the form of housing grants paid direct to the owner of the property they live in) and also agricultural subsidies paid to the owners of large rural estates. So taxes paid by people who have to work to live, gets redistributed to people who don't have to work, but who live off the rent of the land they own.

    Anyway this is off topic. The study itself is interesting.

  8. #18
    aliphian's Avatar
    aliphian is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    And then there's the question, redistribution of wealth of what sort?
    Redistribution of any sort. Grok didn't pay taxes.

  9. #19
    RitaRose's Avatar
    RitaRose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    3,952
    The wealthier men's results seems kind of common sense to me (assuming genes equally capable of being the same size) because wealthy men with large biceps would have a mindset of being able to care for themselves, be it in retirement or a bar fight. Since they've so far been successful at doing so, why would they want that to change by giving away a chunk of their security?

    On the other hand, maybe the poorer men had been working hard physically and didn't have what they felt they "deserved" (I hate that word) and were therefore more open to redistribution, thinking they had in some way "earned it". Or maybe they felt intimidated by wealthier men... I don't know.

    I always wonder why they don't ASK people why they feel the way they do in studies like this. Couldn't hurt, after the fact.
    My sorely neglected blog - http://ThatWriterBroad.com

  10. #20
    wiltondeportes's Avatar
    wiltondeportes Guest
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Basically, men with big biceps want money, and men without muscle don't want money. Strong men want power, weak men don't. Simple....

    It is interesting to see that this cuts across economic classes though.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •