What do each of US feel about Wealth Inequality.

[tigerballs]

Again, CHILDREN.

No one else? Just children?

 

[jadtiger]

Did you know the ALP only won 34 percent of the vote to LIBS 32 percent nationality

The reason they crushed it was because of secondary preferred votes


I know a guy from the TV show MAFS

He was gloating one day about 4 months before the election the ALP gave him two million to run against a LIB held seat on the north shore

He was running as an independent the ALP knew he was going to lose but wanted his preferred votes to go to the ALP candidate to get the ALP over the line

They told him to spend 200K on a campaign manager at least 200K on the advertising and the rest he could do what ever he wanted

I told him that's amazing you get so much tax payer money

Actually Labor received just over 34.5 % the COMBINED LNP vote was less than 28%,the actual Liberal vote was barely over 20%.Dutton was a disgrace and a continuation of poor leadership in the coalition.

 

[crazycat]

My problem with organised charities lies in the logistics of running them. There are roughly 64 thousand in Australia whereas larger countries like America have 1.8 million and India reportedly 3 million. I’d like to know the combined operating costs of them all.
The Charity Aid Foundations annual report claims that 64% of the world’s population gave to charity last year. It’s not making any difference.
I think a more personal approach is required. Look after and support your own area. For instance, I regularly donate trucks and excavators for a couple of days everytime an ND hits our region to aid cleanup and I give to the surf lifesaving club. They are sporadic, yet practical contributions with measurable outcomes and I’ll tell you now, plenty of others do so as well.

We are off topic though…wealth distribution is a problem above our place in the chain. Governments and the special interest groups that run them would prefer to spend trillions on war. Keeping the masses under control is far more in their plans than providing equality. Shaming people who can barely afford to give money to do so on moral grounds is nasty and that’s why I’m no fan of this Singer prick.

Tucker, personal action is awesome.

Heck knew a guy that took disabled kids surfing. All time, all money spent was pure donation. Great for kids, great for him.

The argument though that you should donate X% of your income isn't a bad one though. It puts a clear bar, a clear level.
Singer made the donation point from the idea that "people in 3rd world country are starving, you can donate some food with very little discomfort".
You instead go "stuff some mismanaged western Charity, Ill do charity at home".

^Not going to knock that.
Heck I will applaud it.

I will say "don't niggle the charities on admin" too much. I know having been involved with Charities that kind of thinking leads too "Can we afford a new staplier this month" and just wrongheaded thinking. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ exists and you can look them up. Charities over 90% are usually pretty good.
But hey donate local is fine.


To the point though, Singer made the claim that you should donate at least 1% of your income. i.e. if you make $300 per week you should donate $3.
Now, some people in that income bracket that $3 is A LOT, I get that. Heck single parent on $300pw they are going to spend their excess on their kids lunch they can barely afford. This doesn't break Singer's argument here, if your net income is Negative or just floating then I think Singers arguments "for minor discomfort you could contribute to saving a life" don't apply.

Singer does shame Billionares. He specifically names "Paul Allen" and his 200 Million mega Yacht.
Jeff Bezos hired Milan, practically rented the entire city for his wedding.
We have people with Obscene amounts of money and if they are not donating a high percentage point (singer says the scale increases with income), they should be shamed.

Warren Buffet, Bill Gates both have donated huge amounts.

*THIS arugment, not defending and may attack Singers other ideas.

 

[Tigrr2]

We live in a country where the top 50 companies ( Big 4 banks, Telstra etc) are mostly owned by the US company Blackrock/ Vanguard with they being the major shareholders. The country has already been sold to the US Corporations who are running the world. We are all captured by these Corporations who control our polluted Food systems, the corrupted Medical Industry, the Mortgage Industry, etc etc We are all victims of their control with our constantly inept Govts being total compromised fools at best. Its good to worry guys as AI will be used to try and enslave makind even further.

 

[BZN]

I thought you started this thread to talk about the inequality of the uber rich vs the rest of us but I quickly worked out that wasn’t the agenda.
The reason I used that example above is because there is talk that those over 120, 150 etc should be doing more.
Look I have some sympathy for people trying to live on less than 60k a year but at the end of the day Im not fully sympathetic. They can re-train, re-skill, re-educate…there are plenty of Government assisted programmes to help them.
But no…let’s give them tax cuts and sting those who have completed the above and are making something of their lives.
It is socialist BS.

My apology if you feel I have led you astray, but Imo wealth inequality ["uber rich V the rest of us"], tax inequality, charities and donations to charities and homelessness are all aspects of a "tax extreme wealth movement"...... Imo.

 

[BZN]

Yeah well, Brexit has changed residency status options and long been responsible for the loss of at least 4% of the nation's GDP according to their OBM, with a recent US report stating that the current figure of its damaging effects some decade on is likely closer to 8%.

Meanwhile we have the party rebadged as Reform, still led by the same man that was mostly responsible for Brexit and like it's lower leadership, seems likely to have long been a Russian asset that is still trying to divide the nation by blaming race and immigrants.

Again this party is funded and promoted by the wealthy that caused the wealth disparity and control nearly all forms of media.

"control nearly all forms of the media" is another huge problem.
Rupert Murdock for instance.
But I won't start on that.... possibly off track.

 

[BZN]

You’ve answered most of your own questions.
However holding a demonstration to sulk and demand extreme wealth should be taxed more is a waste of time as they make the rules.

How do you link a group that is passionately concerned about something/anything to sulking.
The formation of a group saying "tax extreme wealth" could grow into a movement that put's a stop to the wealthy "making the rules".