Time for a mass redistribution of wealth

reply to post by Antigod

There was some fascinating research done into 'luck'. The people who considered themselves unlucky turned out to be functionally blind to opportunities that arose compared to those who described themselves as lucky. The 'lucky' person spend energy checking out potential sources of gain that 'unlucky people' ignored. The luck people kept on trying even when things look bad So people really do have a major part to play in their own 'luck'.

So the study categorized luck as what those that express opportunistic behavior think about themselves. Since we can say that luck is not a factor at all.

Note that randomness is not exactly random when people can be seen influencing it, a weak effect but an effect that is statistically observable.

Now if we observe the numbers for example in business creation the fails surpass the wins, and so on, so taking risks is not by itself a guarantee of positive returns it just increases the chance of adding more paths to the possible choices and so more opportunities.

But I wouldn't put much faith in any conclusion, for example the goals, values, morality (etc.) are so diverse at an individual level that a direct comparison is impossible but yes I see how those that take more chances and work in an opportunistic way will overtime (if the behiviour is consistent) have an increased number of positive returns, but most likely they would have also an increase in negative ones...

I do share already. Taxes. Income taxes, property taxes, sale taxes etc, etc.

How much more of my money do you want?

Panic2k11
reply to post by Antigod

 

There was some fascinating research done into 'luck'. The people who considered themselves unlucky turned out to be functionally blind to opportunities that arose compared to those who described themselves as lucky. The 'lucky' person spend energy checking out potential sources of gain that 'unlucky people' ignored. The luck people kept on trying even when things look bad So people really do have a major part to play in their own 'luck'.

So the study categorized luck as what those that express opportunistic behavior think about themselves. Since we can say that luck is not a factor at all.

Note that randomness is not exactly random when people can be seen influencing it, a weak effect but an effect that is statistically observable.

Now if we observe the numbers for example in business creation the fails surpass the wins, and so on, so taking risks is not by itself a guarantee of positive returns it just increases the chance of adding more paths to the possible choices and so more opportunities.

But I wouldn't put much faith in any conclusion, for example the goals, values, morality (etc.) are so diverse at an individual level that a direct comparison is impossible but yes I see how those that take more chances and work in an opportunistic way will overtime (if the behiviour is consistent) have an increased number of positive returns, but most likely they would have also an increase in negative ones...

Well the work showed that given the same set of opportunites, 'unlucky' people just didn't see opportunites. Over the course of a lifetime opportunity seeking behaviour will pay off. Looks like luck, but isn't luck.

I do competitions a lot, now and then I win something. Someone says, 'your so lucky, I never win anything'. Well I win stuff because I do competitions. Unless there's been some major incident in your life like some drunk driver smashing your legs to bits or child abuse that screws you up, generally your life is what you've made of it. Most of the people I know broke by forty are there as a result of stupid behaviour, barring a few sick people.

reply to post by spiritualzombie


There's a lot of fear in greed.

reply to post by Tarzan the apeman.


There is a lot of greed in coveting what someone else has to the point you think they should pay you for nothing more than breathing air.

spiritualzombie

Antigod

Take away their stuff and they'll sulk and then refuse to work

This. Thanks, by the way. That post was awesome. Very informative! But this right here. This is sh*tty human beings when we are talking about billionaires-- Unless you can tell me... How does an individual 'need' to have 'stuff' in the billions without being morbidly greedy?

edit on 1-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)

Like I said, most of these billionaires are running vastly productive business empires. They make their money by being the best at what they do, which actually benefits others as they produce good and services needed in the most effective way. They also boost ecomomies around them. Unused wealth in the bank is invested in loans to other people (mortgages, starting businesses etc).

You may think they are greedy, but they did make the money.

reply to post by Antigod

Over the course of a lifetime opportunity seeking behaviour will pay off.

Not so fast... You can't extrapolate that, the simple fact is that life by its own nature does not permit anyone to remain static so there is no equal distribution across the axis.

'your so lucky, I never win anything'

Does not imply lack of trying, especially if we extrapolate that to the way human society works like a casino, the house is always the ultimate winner (in that case the goals of those that establish the rules).

Most of the people I know broke by forty are there as a result of stupid behaviour, barring a few sick people.

This is the majority of people, especially in the western world the chances of getting lucky are decreasing, in that reality next generations will have access to less optimal choices...

Time for a mass redistribution of wealth

SIGH....

If we could have a "mass redistribution" of intelligence, logic, rationality, critical thinking, and just plain sanity, this supposed cure-all redistribution of wealth wouldn't even be an issue.

reply to post by Leonidas


From keeping what one acquires to preventing anyone else to supplant oneself in the competition for everything else one still doesn't own...

The corner stone is ownership, that is why all this mess around us evolved from agrarian societies that coveted land that shouldn't in the first place be owned by anyone. If we consider the pressure of future generations it becomes apparent that there will always be those that will be left out and oppressed as to never have a chance to make their logical claim to a piece of the pie.

And so what we get is this cannibalistic rat race, that promotes the most psychopathic individuals...

reply to post by OpinionatedB


The word 'greed' originated in the 16th century and is the back formation of the word greedy. What people commonly mean when they reference the word 'greed' is the desire to have or attain possessions, such as material wealth, that they do not deserve or need. Found that online. When one has more then they need they must fear something. If I owned a billion dollar company, I am going to make sure the people that got me there, get their share. From the worker on the floor first, and then go up from there. As far as politicians running around saying how we need to redistribute wealth, well as others have stated, give yours away first then we'll talk. In other words actions speak louder then words.

Panic2k11
reply to post by Antigod

 

Over the course of a lifetime opportunity seeking behaviour will pay off.

Not so fast... You can't extrapolate that, the simple fact is that life by its own nature does not permit anyone to remain static so there is no equal distribution across the axis.

'your so lucky, I never win anything'

Does not imply lack of trying, especially if we extrapolate that to the way human society works like a casino, the house is always the ultimate winner (in that case the goals of those that establish the rules).

Does not imply trying?

Actually that's exactly what it meant. If you don't enter competitions you won't win. People who claim bad luck typically don't do things that lead to opportunity.

Our divorced unemployed family friend keeps moaning about his bad luck, observation of him and other people I know claiming bad luck has told me that they're own behaviour is what's lead them into trouble. One guy in particular keeps going on about how hard done by he is. Has lived at home unemployed from 18 to 40, being supported by parents until he was in his late thirties, no health problems that weren't due to his drinking and dope smoking. But apparently bad luck was the reason he's broke at 40.

The trick to financial sucess (observing successful familiy members) seems to be consistent hard work, and investing and not spending money in your twenties, and waiting a while to have kids. Being your own boss seems to be a big help, as does setting up a business with employees. Most of these are things most people could have a go at.

there will always be those that will be left out and oppressed as to never have a chance to make their logical claim to a piece of the pie.

reply to post by Panic2k11


How can you say someone will "never have a chance"?
The list of rags-to-riches stories could fill volumes. Hell, it's literally become cliche. The person who was sleeping in their car 3 years ago is living in a mansion now.

Here's a small list:
Rags to Riches

Billionaire Steve Forbes was once debating a progressive liberal-type person who said "The rich have all the pie, and they're too greedy to share any of it."

Forbes replied: "You can have the whole damn pie. I'll just bake another one. Take that one too. I'll just bake another one."

reply to post by ColeYounger


He said there will always be SOME that never have a chance:

Young person or kid, cut down in war, gang fight, senesless other violent means.

Kids who drop from school and decide to run with gangs instead.

Many people in countries like North Korea......some starving to death while still kids.

Genocide in other countries.

Many examples of how SOME literally never had a chance.

reply to post by ColeYounger

Forbes replied: "You can have the whole damn pie. I'll just bake another one. Take that one too. I'll just bake another one

Exactly. So many people fail to grasp that they create wealth. Not you, obviously.

eriktheawful
reply to post by ColeYounger

 

He said there will always be SOME that never have a chance:

Young person or kid, cut down in war, gang fight, senesless other violent means.

Kids who drop from school and decide to run with gangs instead.

Many people in countries like North Korea......some starving to death while still kids.

Genocide in other countries.

Many examples of how SOME literally never had a chance.

So exactly how many people are the successful supposed to provide for? Why are the problems of other countries their responsibility? What makes one person responsible for anothers welfare?

(FYI, actually pro a welfare state, but there have to be limits)

Why is some idiot drop out gang member chanceless? I come from a truly crap background (begging for food bad) didn't get involved with crime and never got into debt.

beezzer
reply to post by spiritualzombie

 

Yeah! Right on!

You grab the pitchforks, I'll get the torches!

What do we do after we take all the rich people's money?

Do we kill them?
Toss them in jail?
Make them poor and hungry?

Let's take everything from everyone that has more! Then WE'LL be the ones that have more!

Then no-one better take it from us, right?

'Cause then we'll be the 1% and we EARNED it by taking it from those who earned-. . . . oh.

Um, never mind. . . . . .

You're right. Lets just do nothing and hope that the billionaires of this world decide to stop being greedy tax avoiding pigs.

Um, Never mind. . . .

reply to post by spiritualzombie


How bout you figure out how to generate your own wealth and not try to steal the money of others no matter how much they have. I am not rich. Lower middle class is about where I'd put our family. I would never think hey he's rich he should give some of his money to me.
Now try to put yourself in the chair of that 1%. How would you feel if you suddenly had to give your money away. Just give it because someone can't figure out how to make a living. I'd scream bloody murder. That's crap.
You get what you deserve. You get what you work for. If I were rich I would certainly be charitable but if someone demanded that I redistribute my wealth because someone else is too lazy or stupid to earn a living I would revolt.
I don't see how anyone could even think this was a good idea except for those who would take the handout and then probably waste it on drugs or something equally stupid. There are reasons some folks get rich and others struggle. It's their motivation. The money is there for the earning. Take what you get make some investments make it work for you.
Even I have my meager stock portfolio. I don't have much to invest but $50.00 a month over twenty years has given me a savings account of about $30,000.00 Not a fortune but at least I am trying. I am too proud to take handouts.

reply to post by SearchLightsInc


You really think someone should just hand over their money because you want it? Yeah ok. There's someone out there with less than you. What would you do if you were forced to provide for them because you have more? The only thing missing from this is the ski mask and handgun. That's robbery. Plain and simple.

reply to post by eriktheawful


Birth control. Don't have the kids they won't starve. You always have a choice. Make good ones. No gotta get laid.

Panic2k11
reply to post by Leonidas

 

From keeping what one acquires to preventing anyone else to supplant oneself in the competition for everything else one still doesn't own...

The corner stone is ownership, that is why all this mess around us evolved from agrarian societies that coveted land that shouldn't in the first place be owned by anyone. If we consider the pressure of future generations it becomes apparent that there will always be those that will be left out and oppressed as to never have a chance to make their logical claim to a piece of the pie.

And so what we get is this cannibalistic rat race, that promotes the most psychopathic individuals...

edit on 1-2-2014 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)

Just tell me how much more of my money needs to be "redistributed" to your list of the worthy?