TLS c/o 2020 - In #Squad We Trust Forum

[chargers21]

.

[Rigo]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

people with good looks also have huge advantages over ugly people. I don't think the state should be involved in that though.

Cmon, that's not even remotely the same thing

I actually think it is. regardless, I do think it's an unearned right. but I also don't think it's something that has moral status. saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born rich" is like saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born with blue eyes." so if you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of morality, I don't think it works. I don't think you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of consequentialism since you're referring to the fact that they are "advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit."

The question wasn't if being born rich was immoral, but you're the king of straw men so I'm not even gonna bother.
Also wealth is an objective measure. Hotness is not.

[waldorf]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

Simple. Life is not fair. Your job is to make the most of your unique situation and circumstances.

+1.

Also, yes, they have a lot of advantages. But are you going to tell people that they can't work so their children can have a better life? One reason (actually, probably the biggest) I want to do well for myself is to give my children advantages that I didn't have. What is wrong with that?

You nailed it. I am working hard so that my children, and in turn their children, can have better lives than I had. That incentivizes me working hard.

I'm not going to deny that children who's parents have even a little money have it a LOT easier than those in extreme poverty. But I'm also not going to slam people for working hard to give their children a better life or demand they be taxed at rates that are blind theft (1/3 of anyone's income is absurd, sorry).

[Rigo]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

[RParadela]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

people with good looks also have huge advantages over ugly people. I don't think the state should be involved in that though.

Cmon, that's not even remotely the same thing

I actually think it is. regardless, I do think it's an unearned advantage. but I also don't think it's something that has moral status. saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born rich" is like saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born with blue eyes." so if you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of morality, I don't think it works. I don't think you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of consequentialism since you're referring to the fact that they are "advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit."

Oh, I'm definitely not saying it's immoral to take advantage of the oppurtunities presented to you. I'm just pointing out that the consquence in believing in a society where there are minimal or zero structures to help level the playing field is that the rich will always stay rich and the poor will almost always stay poor no matter how "hard" the poor person works or how little the rich person does.

Obviously, we have a lot of those structures in place, but by hypothetically slashing taxes, you would be removing those structures from existence

[proteinshake]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

people with good looks also have huge advantages over ugly people. I don't think the state should be involved in that though.

Cmon, that's not even remotely the same thing

I actually think it is. regardless, I do think it's an unearned right. but I also don't think it's something that has moral status. saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born rich" is like saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born with blue eyes." so if you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of morality, I don't think it works. I don't think you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of consequentialism since you're referring to the fact that they are "advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit."

The question wasn't if being born rich was immoral, but you're the king of straw men so I'm not even gonna bother.
Also wealth is an objective measure. Hotness is not.

LOL.

"how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have? Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit."

I'm pretty sure there's some moral analysis going on there. but don't quote me if you're "not gonna bother." the moral status of being born richer than others is relevant.

"Also wealth is an objective measure. Hotness is not." -- irrelevant. my statement should be interpreted to mean "people who a majority of people would find attractive vs people who a majority of people would find unattractive."

[chargers21]

.

[RParadela]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

Simple. Life is not fair. Your job is to make the most of your unique situation and circumstances.

+1.

Also, yes, they have a lot of advantages. But are you going to tell people that they can't work so their children can have a better life? One reason (actually, probably the biggest) I want to do well for myself is to give my children advantages that I didn't have. What is wrong with that?

Wait what? Who is saying that people can't work towards a better life? I and some of the others are arguing against the idea that taxation is theft. And in particular, I'm pointing out that without taxation the playing field is so unequal that there is almost zero upward mobility.

[Rigo]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

Well, to be honest, my biggest feud is with standard income taxes and property taxes (i.e. you're either paying taxes on something you already own or you never really own your property in the first place and are simply renting it from the government).

Hey I'm down to change up property taxes since it's a system that creates ridiculously unequal public education.

[Alexandros]

To stir the pot a little again.. For those of you who were railing against taxation, how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have. Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit.

people with good looks also have huge advantages over ugly people. I don't think the state should be involved in that though.

Cmon, that's not even remotely the same thing

I actually think it is. regardless, I do think it's an unearned right. but I also don't think it's something that has moral status. saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born rich" is like saying "it's immoral for someone to have advantages because they were born with blue eyes." so if you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of morality, I don't think it works. I don't think you're trying to justify wealth transfer on the basis of consequentialism since you're referring to the fact that they are "advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit."

The question wasn't if being born rich was immoral, but you're the king of straw men so I'm not even gonna bother.
Also wealth is an objective measure. Hotness is not.

LOL.

"how do you reconcile the fact that people born into money have huge amounts of advantages that kids born in poor family simply do not have? Advantages that rich kids never worked for a day in their life and haven't earned on merit. people with good looks also have huge advantages over ugly people. I don't think the state should be involved in that though."

I'm pretty sure there's some moral analysis going on there. but don't quote me if you're "not gonna bother." the moral status of being born richer than others is relevant.

"Also wealth is an objective measure. Hotness is not." -- irrelevant. my statement should be interpreted to mean "people who a majority of people would find attractive vs people who a majority of people would find unattractive."

You were "morally justifying" (for lack of a better word) people who earned their wealth earlier, as an argument against taxation, so I think the question was how you justify the (many, many) people whose wealth was not earned (at least, not by them.)

[azaleafire]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

Well, to be honest, my biggest feud is with standard income taxes and property taxes (i.e. you're either paying taxes on something you already own or you never really own your property in the first place and are simply renting it from the government).

Hey I'm down to change up property taxes since it's a system that creates ridiculously unequal public education.

^^^this

[chargers21]

.

[Rigo]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

Well, to be honest, my biggest feud is with standard income taxes and property taxes (i.e. you're either paying taxes on something you already own or you never really own your property in the first place and are simply renting it from the government).

Hey I'm down to change up property taxes since it's a system that creates ridiculously unequal public education.

Oh yeah, in my ideal world leveling public education is the best way to level the playing field. I personally feel like my public education limited my opportunities compared to many people that I've met, and while my school system was pretty lacking, I most certainly didn't go to the worst school possible. Others definitely have had it worse from that perspective

Damn we just built some bridges across the aisle. First waiters threads, next Washington!

[Stephylynette]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

Well, to be honest, my biggest feud is with standard income taxes and property taxes (i.e. you're either paying taxes on something you already own or you never really own your property in the first place and are simply renting it from the government).

Hey I'm down to change up property taxes since it's a system that creates ridiculously unequal public education.

That last point. I endorse it.

[proteinshake]

dammit, Kopetz

[chargers21]

.

[Rigo]

I vote democrat (~90%), we're on the same side of the aisle I think! Maybe a bridge from one side of the left to the other?

Oh my b, but hey the left needs all the bridges it can get since we're obviously the weakest tent in the circus.

[Monday]

.

[Stephylynette]

Also, when people discuss inherited wealth they aren't talking about your lil nouveau biglaw salary. Rich offspring are laughing at you guys busting your ass to make that little money.

Well, to be honest, my biggest feud is with standard income taxes and property taxes (i.e. you're either paying taxes on something you already own or you never really own your property in the first place and are simply renting it from the government).

Hey I'm down to change up property taxes since it's a system that creates ridiculously unequal public education.

That last point. I endorse it.

Are you testing the waters or your NYR resolve?

Nope. This was simply endorsement of a fact. No debate or argument. I'm still in compliance. just let me believe this logic. I couldn't resist butting in

[proteinshake]

You were "morally justifying" (for lack of a better word) people who earned their wealth earlier, as an argument against taxation, so I think the question was how you justify the (many, many) people whose wealth was not earned (at least, not by them.)

wait which post? I'm not actually against taxation btw, but I might have posted some arguments against it because I've studied some.

[Keilz]

Hey sry to talk about law skool but if anyone who attended the Duke open house in addition to Cornell and/or michigan, and wouldn't mind sharing their thoughts on how Duke compares to either of the two, it would be super helpful!! I went to C and M but not D

[Alexandros]

You were "morally justifying" (for lack of a better word) people who earned their wealth earlier, as an argument against taxation, so I think the question was how you justify the (many, many) people whose wealth was not earned (at least, not by them.)

wait which post? I'm not actually against taxation btw, but I might have posted some arguments against it because I've studied some.

I thought you were one of the ones saying taxation is theft (which, in my mind, translates to being against taxation). Seems I was mistaken.

[proteinshake]

You were "morally justifying" (for lack of a better word) people who earned their wealth earlier, as an argument against taxation, so I think the question was how you justify the (many, many) people whose wealth was not earned (at least, not by them.)

wait which post? I'm not actually against taxation btw, but I might have posted some arguments against it because I've studied some.

I thought you were one of the ones saying taxation is theft (which, in my mind, translates to being against taxation). Seems I was mistaken.

nope not me. I was posting at the same time as those people tho so I understand the confusion.

[Alexandros]

You were "morally justifying" (for lack of a better word) people who earned their wealth earlier, as an argument against taxation, so I think the question was how you justify the (many, many) people whose wealth was not earned (at least, not by them.)

wait which post? I'm not actually against taxation btw, but I might have posted some arguments against it because I've studied some.

I thought you were one of the ones saying taxation is theft (which, in my mind, translates to being against taxation). Seems I was mistaken.

nope not me. I was posting at the same time as those people tho so I understand the confusion.

My bad.

[Hennessy]

I wish everyone in this discussion would post their undergrad major when commenting I'm curious to see the correlation between different world views and what you studied in college!

For example, I studied global studies (where sometimes class discussions came close to saying capitalism is terrible and communism isn't that bad) and nonprofit/public management (which was housed in our business school--and let's be real, the business classes had a MUCH different opinion about capitalism). A lot of the time, I would have professors spouting completely contradictory ideologies at me in the same semester. My husband graduated with a business degree. When he would read my global studies papers for me, he was always flabergasted by some of the ideas contained therein.

Not trying to say that if you majored in a particular subject, you are bound to think/believe a certain way, but I do think that there is probably some correlation.

African-American Studies and Politics