TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Social Equality? So share the expenses of the wealthy, too.

Assuming socialism is right, the rich should give the poor their money. Why does it not also follow that the poor must also then share in the risks/debts/expenses/hard work/smart work/saving money which the wealthy use to create economic wealth?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 3 2013: Personally I don't think either socialism or pure capitalism is the best solution for the society and individuals.

    What we need is to use the best of both socialism and capitalism. We need to provide social services and benefits while having a fair distribution of wealth based on effort, experience, risk taking etc.

    What seems to be happening during the last few decades is that wealthy are extracting huge profits from their employees and society. Meanwhile technology allowed for great savings and improvements in production of goods and services, lowering cost while employee salaries stayed fairly constant. It is also fact that many companies and rich individuals are avoiding paying taxes. This robs the society and individuals their fair share and it causes social friction.

    Wealthy individuals need workers and workers need jobs and each should have a fair share of money.
    • Apr 3 2013: So what is the fair share? An employER would say that since without him there would be no job may overvalue his share. An employEE would say that without him there would be no worker, and may overvalue himself. So what if an employer says 'this is the fair share, take it or leave it', an employee says 'ok, I agree that's fair', or maybe negotiates it to a win-win deal, and they reach symbiosis. That seems fair. That IS fair.

      Now say a third party comes in and says to the employee, 'you're getting ripped off, let's get some more money from these guys for you'. It gets political votes since the majority of americans are the employEE type who feel entitled to more. So then we get politicians who support this way of thinking to win votes, but the employERs that are really creating economic value are left with less.

      I'm financially an average american. I'm not trying to protect my large stacks, so don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying that the wealthy therefore lead tough lives, and they need more money to get by. I am saying that couldn't both the wealthy AND poor be better off if the one of them who creates more economic value, gets to keep more money? IE let the wealthy keep a dollar, turn it into two, and then give the employees more. By forcing large taxes on corporations, I believe that governments hinder their ability to give back to the employees/community/etc.
      • Apr 3 2013: Yes I agree with what you are saying. I am only pointing at the seemingly unfair distribution of wealth. However I am not advocating equality.

        Have a look at these two articles:
        http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/03/taxpayers_helped_apple_but_app.html

        http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/

        What do you think?

        cheers
        • Apr 3 2013: The wealth inequality video is interesting. To me it's more telling about how money is more important to some than others, not how inequality is awry. I think you and I are on the same page, so here are a couple interesting questions.

          -Ya those spikes are interesting, but that's what other people valued those wealthy individuals at right?
          -What bystander deserves the right to say "hey that other guy bought something from the rich guy for X dollars, I deserve a cut"?
      • Apr 4 2013: -What bystander deserves the right to say "hey that other guy bought something from the rich guy for X dollars, I deserve a cut"?

        In my mind the problem is more about the fact that if I work for a rich guy why I cannot make very good money if I make the company really profitable through my work? Why the wealthy guy pays less taxes than ever before? Why his company is avoiding paying taxes through tax havens thus indirectly robing me services I don't receive through government since government has less tax revenues?

        cheers

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.