Poll: Do you believe the people that have the most, have "earned" it?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Totally agree with you there

I am lucky that, even though my parents didn't have much money, the outlook in my home was still very positive and my brother and I were encouraged to have high aspirations

I'm "fortunate" (lol) to have had the type of family that I had growing up...they were like your family in that education, hard work and support were in abundance for me when I was growing up. Doesn't mean I didn't have times where the electricity was cut off because we couldn't afford to pay the bill or times when I had oatmeal for dinner due to lack of money...but none of that trumped the very real positives I had surrounding me.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I think there's a difference between being "fortunate" and chalking up success to "luck", though. Many people are fortunate to have the opportunities or connections they have...and yes, even those who live in poverty-stricken areas will say they were fortunate to have the right teacher, or the right mentor, or get the right job with the right boss...or just "fortunate" to have the type of mother or father they had, or the right type of extended family...

"Luck", however, hints at something far, far more arbitrary.

That's fair.

I would classify my situation as fortunate, but not lucky. I didn't get adopted by Mr. Drummand or anything...

[Destino]

The concept of Accumulating Advantage plays a large role in many of the worlds richest people. Many start way ahead of most and have a lot less ground to cover... also a well structured financial house is hard to dismantle quickly. If their inheritance is in the form of a diverse wealth producing assets you can literally spend all your time on vacation and make money.

Self made men can often claimed to have earned it... and they are as close to accurate as you can be. Those born with tremendous wealth can make no such claim. They've done as much to earn their wealth as newborns have done to earn their citizenship.

[No_Pressure]

And all of that is irrelevant. We don't pay for our public schools like we pay for entertainment.

Even if every single football fan never spent another nickel on football for the rest of their lives, that wouldn't effect how much teachers get paid one iota. Teachers get paid through our taxes...it's forced.

It isn't forced like the income tax. You have control over your local taxes. Have you ever been to the polls for city or county issues? Have you ever voted for or against teacher raises? Are you electing the people who are putting together the budget? Residents of a school district decide what value they want to place on education and how much they can pay.

The better example would be saying if all public schools were abolished and you had to start paying to send your kids to private schools, how many Redskins fans would give up a sizeable portion of their Skins expenses in order to send their kids to school? I would say over 95% would. They might hate it, but they would do so. But education and entertainment are not in competition with each other for our dollars (at least not directly)...so our comparisons of teachers to football players and their salaries is flawed form the get-go.

Answer one question: You go to vote on some local propositions. One of them is a proposition to give teachers a 10% raise which is paid for by a 10% increase to your property taxes. The extra 10% on your property taxes would cost you 2,000 dollars. If you pay for the teacher raise you won't be able to pay for your 2,000 dollar season tickets to the Redskins. Which would you honestly choose? Would you give up your season tickets to shoulder a greater burden with a school district? Say you really value education and would give up season tickets for teacher raises. Would most people in that situation? Probably not. Thats all I was saying.

Again, you're talking about "deserves" versus "earns"...there's no real concrete, tangible way of translating societal "deserving" into monetary "earnings". Portis makes more than the president of the United States, afterall lol...

It's not about what people "deserve".

I think you have me confused with somebody who actually believes that teachers SHOULD make more than Clinton Portis.

I never said it was about what people deserve. I said to Painkiller that in the ideal society people would be paid more based on their value to society. But since a society like that is impossible to ever produce with human beings, we're stuck with what we have and it's the best we can do, and all a person can do it make decisions that they think will benefit the most and live with what they have chosen.

Of course Clinton Portis is more valuable than a teacher to our society, and while the reasons why are obvious, I'm saying that people who work the **** jobs for little pay as Painkiller was talking about, in spite of being more valuable to society than a guy who runs a football around on a field, will never be given a close or equal monetary value from others because when it comes down to it if many people had to choose between their season tickets and a raise in their property taxes they're going to want their season tickets.

Don't believe me? Turn on the radio if you're in the D.C. area. Count how many stations are discussing the Redskins and the NFL and how many stations are talking about education, sanitation, transportation, etc.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I'm not proposing that anything should change. I'm simply looking at this more philosophically and just mentioning that hard work isn't always enough (and sometimes not even necessary) to live comfortably.

Hard work isn't enough...but if anyone is waiting for "luck" to come their way they're making a mistake. And if anyone is thinking the only thing keeping them from succeeding or making more money is a lack of "luck", they're making an even bigger mistake.

Everyone, everywhere, has opportunities that they are given. Everyone. Just depends on if you take advantage of it or not.

[Predicto]

A lot of what you and Predicto are talking about have to do with the circumstances you are born into. How do you make everybody's family life equal and fair? It's impossible to level that playing field....

How is anybody supposed to account for those things?

There is no easy answer. I'm not in favor of collecitivization or any nonsense like that.

But I do have a more "liberal" outlook on some issues that, in my view, provide for a little more equality of opportunity. For example, I do not think that college admissions should be blind to the circumstances that a person grew up in. The kid who got the 70th percentile on the SAT coming from McLean High is not as impressive to me as the kid who got the 60th percentile on the SAT coming from Grundy, West Virginia. The first kid is middle of the pack, the second kid is probably pretty extraordinary. If you give that kid from Grundy a chance, he is very likely going to achieve as much or more than the other kid.

Stuff like that.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

That's fair.

I would classify my situation as fortunate, but not lucky. I didn't get adopted by Mr. Drummand or anything...

:rotflmao:

[Destino]

Hard work isn't enough...but if anyone is waiting for "luck" to come their way they're making a mistake. And if anyone is thinking the only thing keeping them from succeeding or making more money is a lack of "luck", they're making an even bigger mistake.

Everyone, everywhere, has opportunities that they are given. Everyone. Just depends on if you take advantage of it or not.

Luck plays a role but you have to be prepared to take advantage of it. Like you said opportunity slaps people in the face every day but most aren't in a position where they can do anything about it. You have to be ready financially and mentally and you have to have the courage to go for it.

Most people can't even define success. If you think success is simply "making more money" I'd say you're wrong. Financial success is found income producing assets. Working harder to make more money steals your time which is more valuable than money. You want both, time and money. Get that and even if you are making 40k a year you are far far far ahead of people that are making 200k a year but working their asses off for every penny.

[Commander PK]

Most people can't even define success. If you think success is simply "making more money" I'd say you're wrong. Financial success is found income producing assets. Working harder to make more money steals your time which is more valuable than money. You want both, time and money. Get that and even if you are making 40k a year you are far far far ahead of people that are making 200k a year but working their asses off for every penny.

Well, it's true that nobody ever said on their death bed that they wished they had made more money.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

It isn't forced like the income tax. You have control over your local taxes. Have you ever been to the polls for city or county issues? Have you ever voted for or against teacher raises? Are you electing the people who are putting together the budget? Residents of a school district decide what value they want to place on education and how much they can pay.

Well, when I say it's "forced", I mean that even if I don't have a kid, I still have to pay lol...when I have no choice in paying for the education of all the kids in my city even though I have no kids of my own, then it's forced in my eyes. How MUCH is forced might be somewhat within my control, but either way I'm gonna be paying whether I want to or not.

Football tickets, on the otherhand, are 1,000% voluntary.

Answer one question: You go to vote on some local propositions. One of them is a proposition to give teachers a 10% raise which is paid for by a 10% increase to your property taxes. The extra 10% on your property taxes would cost you 2,000 dollars. If you pay for the teacher raise you won't be able to pay for your 2,000 dollar season tickets to the Redskins. Which would you honestly choose? Would you give up your season tickets to shoulder a greater burden with a school district? Say you really value education and would give up season tickets for teacher raises. Would most people in that situation? Probably not. Thats all I was saying.

For me, I would first want to know that every penny of my $2,000 raise in taxes would indeed go into teacher's pockets, and NOT into the pockets and budgets of goverment beaurocrats. I've been burned enough by "Vote to raise taxes for school children" rhetoric to believe that all the money I'm paying in extra taxes actually gets seen by the "schoolchildren".

Second, I would have to first believe that the current budget is stretched as far as it can be stretched, and that the reason teachers aren't getting that $2,,000 raise is because there just isn't enough money. But it if's simply goverment fiscal negligence causing any shortfalls in the education budget, giving those same negligent government officials even MORE money is not the answer.

Now...if both of those things prove to be true (100% of the raise in taxes goes directly into teacher's pockets, and there's next to no fiscal negligence on behalf of the government), then I'd have zero problem watching the Skisn from home. But as you can see, simply claiming that my raised taxes will go for teachers' salaries and cute little 3rd graders smiling at me from behind the camera lenses of tv spots wouldn't be enough.

I think you have me confused with somebody who actually believes that teachers SHOULD make more than Clinton Portis.

I never said it was about what people deserve. I said to Painkiller that in the ideal society people would be paid more based on their value to society.

If you think a "perfect" society would indeed have teachers making more than Clinton Portis, then you DO believe teachers "should" be making more than Portis, right? lol :yes:...It's just us imperfect humans that keeps that from being reality.

Of course Clinton Portis is more valuable than a teacher to our society, and while the reasons why are obvious, I'm saying that people who work the **** jobs for little pay as Painkiller was talking about, in spite of being more valuable to society than a guy who runs a football around on a field, will never be given a close or equal monetary value from others because when it comes down to it if many people had to choose between their season tickets and a raise in their property taxes they're going to want their season tickets.

And it's my position that entertainers will ALWAYS make more than trash collectors or toilet scrubbers (of which I was one lol)...because those jobs just do NOT require valuable skills...and can be filled by a multitude of people. The job itself is valuable...but the people who perform those jobs are not because the skill set needed to perform those jobs do not hold much value, and can be found pretty much anywhere.

[No_Pressure]

I would also like to say that pay has not kept up with inflation, and inflation is a big killer of people making less money. I remember I had a history class with a teacher who had been at the school since it opened and he was talking about economics one day and said:

"When I started here in 1970 I was making 15,000 dollars and a new Stingray Corvette cost 6,000 dollars. Today I'm making 60,000 and a new z06 corvette costs 70,000 dollars. Now I know that cars have become a little bit more complex in that time span but gas also went from maybe 25 cents per gallon to 3 dollars."

Incomes have not kept steady with costs. Now sure perhaps the Corvette has some amazing new expensive technology or something in it these days, but the same can be said for housing prices. An average sized single family home in the 70's could go for 30-50 thousand dollars. My brother bought a house in the same neighborhood as my grandparents. They bought in 1964 and the house was 40,000 dollars. My brother bought his for 350,000 dollars. That doesn't make any sense.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Luck plays a role but you have to be prepared to take advantage of it. Like you said opportunity slaps people in the face every day but most aren't in a position where they can do anything about it. You have to be ready financially and mentally and you have to have the courage to go for it.

Most people can't even define success. If you think success is simply "making more money" I'd say you're wrong. Financial success is found income producing assets. Working harder to make more money steals your time which is more valuable than money. You want both, time and money. Get that and even if you are making 40k a year you are far far far ahead of people that are making 200k a year but working their asses off for every penny.

Very true :yes:...

[No_Pressure]

If you think a "perfect" society would indeed have teachers making more than Clinton Portis, then you DO believe teachers "should" be making more than Portis, right? lol :yes:...It's just us imperfect humans that keeps that from being reality.

Wrong. If all things were fair and equal teachers would make more money. Should they make more than they do? Yes. Should teachers in our society as it is, dealing with reality make more money than Clinton Portis? NO. As I've said 200000000000 times you can only play the cards you are given.

And it's my position that entertainers will ALWAYS make more than trash collectors or toilet scrubbers (of which I was one lol)...because those jobs just do NOT require valuable skills...and can be filled by a multitude of people. The job itself is valuable...but the people who perform those jobs are not because the skill set needed to perform those jobs do not hold much value, and can be found pretty much anywhere.

Ah, getting to the philosophy of what I'm saying. FINALLY.

What is valuable for you? Difficult to do? It's difficult to run a football like Portis thats for sure. You don't need training to scrub a toilet, and chances are you won't break your legs or tear up your knees doing it. But the value of those positions are higher than Clinton Portis.

As I said in another post, it is easy as **** to take a number of jobs. Lets say trucking. I could get a CDL easily, and I could be trucking. It doesn't take a lot of skill or talent to drive a truck across the country. You don't need to know anything about trigonometry or be in god-like shape to drive a rig. At the same time if the NFL players went on strike and the season was cancelled, life would go on. If all of the truckers in America stopped trucking tomorrow we would be royally ****ed.

If all of those pathetic trash men stopped conveniently taking away your trash for you, things would start to stink pretty badly.

Who is more valuable to society? My dad today who negotiates millions and billions of dollars in contracts with the government every year and works with numbers, concepts and ideas with a 7 figure salary, or my dad in 1972 crawling the jungle around on a USMC training mission in Okinawa? Am I saying that all skilled people are incapable of doing these valuable jobs? No, but without the "unskilled" labor doing what they do, the people on top wouldn't be able to do what they do. If the CEO's and graphic designers of the world all quit their jobs tomorrow, the important things like food, clean water, sanitation, and transportation would all continue as usual.

You may say that the job itself isn't valuable, and is unskilled and can be filled by anyone but that isn't true. I have worked as a landscaper for 5 years. You would think that it's so simple a cave man could do it like those annoying geico commercials, but in all honesty, after learning how to be a professional at it, I laugh at all the people who try to do their landscaping themselves and are content with a job that looks sloppy and is half done.

Also, are teachers a job that anybody can fill? NCLB made it so all teachers in America have to be highly qualified. You need a 4 year degree and a bunch of tests in order to become a teacher and you are scrutinized a lot more than a lot of jobs in the private sector. How many times does it make the headlines that a local CEO of a major corporation got pulled over for a DUI. How many times does that headline make it if it's a local teacher? Teaching is a lot harder than what my dad does. I've interned at his company, seen what other people do daily. The work is a lot more mindless and tedious than the landscaping I do.

[81artmonk]

I bleieve that the large majority of those people have earned it. There are a few who didn't, but most did.

[81artmonk]

Then my next question is...How do we fix this?

Fix what?? Regardless of how someone got their wealth, it's there wealth. Some have the mindset that if you inherited it, that some how you don't deserve it?? Let's use that logic further. someone in the middle class or even lower classhas their parents die and will them everything they own. If we use the it's not fair or it needs to be fixed mentality than you shouldn't get most of it. you may get the house, but the rest will be given to charity or the less fortunate.

Point is, it doesn't need to be fixed. Their family was rich, they grow up they are rich, why is that a bad thing or something that needs to be punished??

[Arsenic]

In a way..

However, I sometimes feel like the chances are more against some to succeed. Lets say a rich dad puts his kid thru school. In return, that kid tells people "I earned this thru hard schooling". Well some don't have that same opportunity. Yeah i realize there are loans and such but the point is still somewhat valid since we're not all given equal loans. I guess what I'm trying to say is that some must overcome more than others, in order to be as successful.

[sacase]

the way wealth is distributed in this country

Edit: who gets it, and why

This is a scary comment, right out of Atlas Shrugged...How about people worry about getting their instead worrying abou what the next guy has.

[War Paint]

Wrong. If all things were fair and equal teachers would make more money. Should they make more than they do? Yes. Should teachers in our society as it is, dealing with reality make more money than Clinton Portis? NO. As I've said 200000000000 times you can only play the cards you are given.

You know, I don't mean any disrespect to teachers, but they do not deserve more money. They have all the holidays off, weekends off, steady hours, summers off, excellent benefits, most teach and talk about subjects they have an interest in and they don't have to stand on their feet all day. I'm not saying that they don't have tough moments on the job, but really, they make enough.

[Midnight Judges]

Some have, and some have not.

Take my Dad for example. He grew up on a farm without running water or electricity until he was 7. They heated up bath water on a gas stove top. He put himself through college by being in the army reserves, worked for the FED for 30 years and now has his own company with several million in total revenues per year. He worked his ass off and IMO, he deserves every bit of it. Yes, I'm a tad biased.

On the flip side there's Paris Hilton.

[redskins59]

If you're a selfmade man, you obviously deserve all your money. The issue here is inheritance, and after thinking a bit, here's what I think. If your father is a rich man, he has earned the right to make you, the son, a rich man, even though you may be a total dunce.

[Duncan]

If you're a selfmade man, you obviously deserve all your money. The issue here is inheritance, and after thinking a bit, here's what I think. If your father is a rich man, he has earned the right to make you, the son, a rich man, even though you may be a total dunce.

This is dead on. If someone works hard and becomes successful somehow it is not fair if they give the money to the people they love.

The Kennedy family is a group of untalented clowns but I don't mind one bit that they have access to huge trust. Now one could argue Joe Kennedy was a crook and made his money illegitimately but that is another issue.

The problem comes when said family supports raising income taxes and supports the inheritance tax when they pay very little of the former and zero of the latter.

The only way to really remedy the problem is to confiscate wealth, not income. I doubt you will see Senator Kerry introducing that bill in the senate anytime son.

[MEANDWARF]

Then my next question is...How do we fix this?

That's what we're trying to do right now. It's called socialism.

[MEANDWARF]

I think the vast majority have earned it. That is the whole concept of the American Dream. Work hard, study hard and you should go far.

The only one that may not are the ones that were born into it, i.e. Paris Hilton.

[GibbsFactor]

I think we need a cap. 10 billion and you are done, the rest goes to your government. The cap can float.

[Predicto]

We don't need to "fix" it, as such.

We do need to acknowledge it, and sometimes account for it in our policies.

Honestly recognizing that some of us have an easier road to travel does not inexorably lead to Communism.