patrick.net

A million dollars in 1913 (when the Federal Reserve was created) is worth over $30 million in today's inflated currency. So why don't you up the ante a bit?

The fundamental flaw of this system, and all systems like it, is that the orgasmic draw of power does not diminish. It's embedded in the DNA of some human beings...a very strong psychological draw.

The wealth won't be redistributed to the poor. It will be redistributed to a new class of people seeking power...those middle men doing the redistributing.

In laymans terms...meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

IDDQD says

The Professor says

How much money does a person need?

It's up to said person to decide.

"Need" is a harmful word.

How much money does a person want?

You will get 100 answers from 100 people. There is only one correct answer: MORE.

It's important to be able to afford at least one politician.

The Professor says

I know realize that I have chosen the wrong forum to spew my socialist utopian ideals.

Well the flaw is .....its a fairy tale. Much like John Lennon's Imagine(and I despise that song for the same reasons). Its a situation that will never ever exist unless you somehow control or brainwash everyone. Human beings are each individuals and are relatively unique creations with disparate thoughts, ideas, and talents. There simply no one size fits all.

Here's what would work ... every man, woman, and child, hooked up to a virtual reality simulation, where they can experience anything they like to their fitting.

In this scenario, the actual work being done is done by robots and people will simply be living out their fantasies in VR, living on govt subsidies.

The Professor says

How much money does a person need?

why should it be a question of need, but rather what is right?

Why do we want to penalize people for being rich? What crime was committed?
Even if we take this away from legal aspects and speak on the morality of wealth, who is to say that taking wealth away from those who have it a moral thing to do?

To all those who support taxing the rich, etc, etc.... perhaps you should spend more time working to become wealthy, then you wont have to spend so much time thinking of ways to take their money away...

The Professor says

Tax their wealth and not their income.

Because they have devoted many decades to single-mindedly propagandizing the notion that you should never do that? It's the usual problem, most of us are just heads-down doing our thing getting by and getting along.

Richie Rich however lives, breathes, eats, sleeps MONEY. They work 18 hour days thinking about getting MORE MORE MORE and how they can destroy the concept of the estate tax. To tax their WEALTH would be an assault on their ego and their personal dynasty. You may have a variety of interests in your life and money is just an enabler to live that life. To Richie Rich the greatest purpose in life is having a bigger mansion portfolio than the neighbor.

It's sort of the like trying to "understand" a suicide bomber, you can't really relate to them. We have Stockholm Syndrome and will defend them rather than fight them.