Pretty sure that's more money than exists. How does a pile of wealth that ludicrously large slip through the cracks?
The ultra rich dodge taxes on 20+ trillion dollars. In other news, water is damp.
- Thread starter Theseus32
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Pretty sure that's more money than exists. How does a pile of wealth that ludicrously large slip through the cracks?
And?
I'm sorry to be harsh, but this idea that hidden away trillions of money that could and ~will!~ solve the world's problems is merely a flawed concept.
Money, like all things of high importantance the more you have of it, only matters in how it is used. Look at the europian union for example, many of its countries are in debt to germany. Clearing that debt with this hidden money would only pave the way for more debt, since it is the spend of these countries which is the problem.
Take America, you say there is debt in the United States? Why? Is it possibly, oh, I dunno... All the ~spending~ that goes on? How will lotsa money that is hidden somewhere in the end of nowhere going to fix the spending?
Psh, I always facepalm when people think lots of money fixes stuff, in fact, some governments think that is the only way to fix things!
Corruption in government? Hehe, I like the concept, but there are greater things than corruption in one's government. Take the UK for example. In the UK, we're sandwiched between the political powerhouses of America and Europe. Gordon Brown, our previously unelected supreme ruler untill he bit off more than he could chew from the queen, gave almost all our rights to rule ourselves to the heads of the europian union, so that they could define how we are to govern ourselves.
Does that sound good, America? Last I checked, Germany is the center of political power for europe and they diplomatically have us by the balls, thanks to the weakness of our own government. Corruption in our government, only makes us weaker of course, look at gordon brown.
But that doesn't end there, oh no, once ol' Gordon was evicted from his position in the most unbloody of ways, a coalition government was established with one, very big role: Protect our sovereignty against those who would seek to turn us into just another europian nation.
You think money can solve the UK's problems? Pah.
I'm sorry to be harsh, but this idea that hidden away trillions of money that could and ~will!~ solve the world's problems is merely a flawed concept.
Money, like all things of high importantance the more you have of it, only matters in how it is used. Look at the europian union for example, many of its countries are in debt to germany. Clearing that debt with this hidden money would only pave the way for more debt, since it is the spend of these countries which is the problem.
Take America, you say there is debt in the United States? Why? Is it possibly, oh, I dunno... All the ~spending~ that goes on? How will lotsa money that is hidden somewhere in the end of nowhere going to fix the spending?
Psh, I always facepalm when people think lots of money fixes stuff, in fact, some governments think that is the only way to fix things!
Corruption in government? Hehe, I like the concept, but there are greater things than corruption in one's government. Take the UK for example. In the UK, we're sandwiched between the political powerhouses of America and Europe. Gordon Brown, our previously unelected supreme ruler untill he bit off more than he could chew from the queen, gave almost all our rights to rule ourselves to the heads of the europian union, so that they could define how we are to govern ourselves.
Does that sound good, America? Last I checked, Germany is the center of political power for europe and they diplomatically have us by the balls, thanks to the weakness of our own government. Corruption in our government, only makes us weaker of course, look at gordon brown.
But that doesn't end there, oh no, once ol' Gordon was evicted from his position in the most unbloody of ways, a coalition government was established with one, very big role: Protect our sovereignty against those who would seek to turn us into just another europian nation.
You think money can solve the UK's problems? Pah.
While I believe it can be unfair for a small percentage of the population to hold so much wealth, I also believe that the largest portion of that is not in terms of coins or dollars but in material possessions.
Taking away their funds will not directly help the world and only cause inflation if we completely extract it, what we need to do is give these potential investors something worthwhile to invest in, give them the incentive to invest and help stimulate the economy into a good direction. Maybe if we did that, the recession would be a joke, the unemployment levels would practically drop below 4% and maybe a good portion of the US's debt would be gone, but this is only speaking from the point of view of a US citizen, I'm not sure how it would affect the rest of the world.
Taking away their funds will not directly help the world and only cause inflation if we completely extract it, what we need to do is give these potential investors something worthwhile to invest in, give them the incentive to invest and help stimulate the economy into a good direction. Maybe if we did that, the recession would be a joke, the unemployment levels would practically drop below 4% and maybe a good portion of the US's debt would be gone, but this is only speaking from the point of view of a US citizen, I'm not sure how it would affect the rest of the world.
I don't disagree with parents giving their children wealth but I do disagree with wealth accrued through undoubtedly unethical and illegal ways. I don't see the sin in being wealthy because your parents were wealthy. Much poorer or middle class people fight over inheritance in America all the time (of course the filthy rich do as well). How can you say that someone deserves something? By virtue of being a nice person people deserve money? Because someone is a jerk they don't deserve money?Richard A. Kiernan said:
Also this probably comes down to a fundamental difference in beliefs but I believe your family and environment are a large part of who you are. That isn't to say you can't change it but you definitely have a hard time doing so. There were people in Germany during world war II that didn't think themselves as Jews or were even devout Christians but because someone in their past 3 generations of ancestors was Jewish they would be carted off to a concentration camp. For better or for worse it is extremely difficult to change your background and to say that someone "deserves" their family or heritage seems silly (barring extreme cases of course, I wouldn't say a family shouldn't be scorned because there was a relative that was criminal).
Wealth given to you by someone is yours to keep. Simply because you didn't earn it doesn't mean it isn't your right to keep it and do it with it what you want.
Do I think some rich people have skewed ethics? Damn straight. I also think that it is ridiculous that someone isn't willing to part with .1% of their wealth if it can make a pivotal difference.
Sidebar Note: The other argument in this thread that is important to pay attention to questions how useful money is for solving problems because it doesn't solve the source of the problem. Greece was bailed out by Germany and they completely wasted the money on consumer goods instead of developing their economy. Money is not a cure-all for the worlds problems. Money can help individuals who need money expressly to pay for something like a surgery but clearing out debts doesn't help anybody if people keep on behaving in a way that generates debt.
That being said I still think that although it is ridiculous that the filthy rich won't donate much money at all it still isn't wrong for them to keep their money. When we argue that the few must suffer for the many we start sliding down a slippery slope. No innocent person should be sacrificed for the greater good. (Clearly criminals suffer so they can't CAUSE more harm).
On a less civilized note: will all you idiots making comments about America read the damn article and realize that it talks mostly about European countries? Sounds like people trying to sound smart without reading the article the OP is using to make his argument. All you do is detract from what he says.
come on, the whole 'job creators' thing is a pile of horseshit. It's nothing more than 'trickle down economics' and that shit failed thirty years ago.Theseus32 said:
I have no expertise in economics, does this 'hidden money' affect the value of the Euro, Pound or Dollar? I am seeing wildly different opinions on whether this money being used would affect the world at large. People have said putting it back into the economy wouldn't work as the problem is the system and not the amount of money available.
I'd like to know whether or not putting this money back in circulation would have the same affect as just printing more money. I would assume it's lowering the value of money in the economy while not being part of the economy. While putting it back in would destabilise it further? So is this money in fact harming the economy purely by existing?
Having read everything I could only assume burning this money would do the most good on an economic level, which also would explain the reason for no-one doing anything about it since it would require huge amounts of self sacrifice. Could anyone enlighten me further, or explain where I'm wrong?
I do remember a Joker doing something remarkably similar and he was a bad guy, so I assume I've gotten something wrong.
I'd like to know whether or not putting this money back in circulation would have the same affect as just printing more money. I would assume it's lowering the value of money in the economy while not being part of the economy. While putting it back in would destabilise it further? So is this money in fact harming the economy purely by existing?
Having read everything I could only assume burning this money would do the most good on an economic level, which also would explain the reason for no-one doing anything about it since it would require huge amounts of self sacrifice. Could anyone enlighten me further, or explain where I'm wrong?
I do remember a Joker doing something remarkably similar and he was a bad guy, so I assume I've gotten something wrong.
Am I the only one seeing the comparison to Dragons here? These ultra rich fools have more money than they could ever spend. Hell, probably more than they, their children, and their childrens children could ever spend in a lifetime of excess. But they don't even try. They sit on the money and use every trick imaginable to hoard it for themselves, and if you try to do anything about they rain hell down on you via the broken legal system and their puppet politicians.
These people could be advancing the world by leaps and bounds. They could be investing in new technologies that get us away from our dependence on oil, cures for crippling diseases, things that help the whole planet. Instead they lurk in their caves with money they stole from everyone else and go on a rampage if anyone tries to reclaim so much as a penny.
What we need is some dragonslayers. Not in the sense of killing them because that accomplishes nothing,[footnote]Oh, and that would be wrong... and stuff... yeah.[/footnote] but in the sense of being able to take away their power and redistribute the wealth to better uses than mouldering in a dank cave as the bed of an arrogant lizard.
These people could be advancing the world by leaps and bounds. They could be investing in new technologies that get us away from our dependence on oil, cures for crippling diseases, things that help the whole planet. Instead they lurk in their caves with money they stole from everyone else and go on a rampage if anyone tries to reclaim so much as a penny.
What we need is some dragonslayers. Not in the sense of killing them because that accomplishes nothing,[footnote]Oh, and that would be wrong... and stuff... yeah.[/footnote] but in the sense of being able to take away their power and redistribute the wealth to better uses than mouldering in a dank cave as the bed of an arrogant lizard.
Heh, fear the mighty dragon Romnaug! He sells companies when he wishes! He is rich, rich, RICH! His lawyers are like tenfold legal shields! Their indictments like swords! Their defamation lawsuits, like spears! The shock of his terrible singing, a thunderbolt! His policies, a ridiculous semi-racist anti-poor hurricane! And his mindless opposition to Obama even on things he supported prior, death!Tirunus said:
Okay, all mangled hobbit quotes aside...
Having reread my first post it's a little harsher than I meant to be. There's no justification for taking away all the money from the rich, no matter how much some of them may deserve it, but they need to be required to do their part in maintaining a basic functional society. Namely, pay their damn taxes! Makes you wonder why they fought so hard for those tax breaks for the rich when they were just going to ignore tax law anyways...
Well, looks like we're heading towards fun and violence.
And when that day comes, I'll be selling tanks to all sides, ready to put myself at the top of an unchanged world
And when that day comes, I'll be selling tanks to all sides, ready to put myself at the top of an unchanged world
I said 'practically', didn't I? We were the first country to put the practice into a constitution and make it a basic freedom.SL33TBL1ND said:
And your not making any friends by putting snarky comments.
If I was here to make friends, do you think I would be posting like this? I'm here for fun. This, to me, is fun.Saucycarpdog said:
Typical. *SIGH* I really hate rich people sometimes... Well, okay, I don't think we should take all their money (depending on the person, at least), but they should at least have to do this like everyone else...
Saucycarpdog said:
Not by a long shot was America one of the 1st. Such provisions existed in the city state of Athens and the Republic of Rome. Britain had at least some degree protected in Law (and therefore constitution) before the American Revolution.