promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
delina_m asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Why do people only support wealth redistribution when it goes upwards?

At a certain level money makes money more efficiently than labor. If you have a $1,000,000.00 deposit in the bank at 5% interest per year and your bank makes a loan to someone at a 6% interest wealth is being redistributed from the person taking the loan (who is paying for the bank to give you a 5% interest) to the person who just made a deposit and is making $50,000.00 dollars a year without having to lift a finger.

Wealth is being transferred from the working person paying the loan to the person who only makes a passive income by having a large deposit in the bank.

14 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yes you have it right.

    Unfortunately most people are "useful idiots" to the ruling class and they don't realize that banker's capitalism is the ultimate form of wealth re-distribution to people who don't work hard(the bankers and overclass)

    "Socialism for the rich, capitalism for everyone else" refers to the tendency for the overclass to "capitalize" on profits and "socialize" losses among the masses via taxes and bailouts WITH YOUR MONEY. It also refers to several banking practices that have evolved over hundreds of years that have been so driven into public education that people are conditioned not to question it.

    It is a crime against humanity that makes the profit based system knows as banker's capitalism a leach to the world.

    edit: Judging by the answers you have been getting, it would appear they think the current way of running things is the only way(a monetary system with a global overclass stealing and claiming hegemony over all of the earth's resources).

    Source(s): It's a system of consumption and debt that 'capitalizes' on the negative aspects of human behavior. Capitalism often takes that which should be free and sells it back to you at a premium. It dumbs down society, instills greed and hostility, and demoralizes the human spirit.
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Nice try. People object to wealth distribution when the government forcibly takes from those who have to give to those who do not have. No one is forced to take a loan. It is a private business transaction between two private persons or entities. The person with the million dollar bank deposit makes the bank millions of dollars. In return the depositor is rewarded very well. The person accepting the loan agrees to pay back the borrowed money and then some. That is the nature of the business.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    First of all, many people in the U.S. do not support wealth redistribution upwards, but it makes more sense to do so. Wealth concentration at the top has a lot of problems, but it must be recognized that the wealthier the wealthy are, the more capital is generated and the more tax revenues grow. THAT is true, and simple economics. I can't believe some people believe the wealthy don't pay their fair share: Even with all the loopholes and tax havens the wealthy still pay nearly all the taxes in this nation. People want to talk about fairness, so lets talk: How is it fair to make a man who makes 10 times more than you pay 20 or 30 times as much in taxes. THAT is not fair. Oh, and one last thing. Working-class people damn the wealthy for their wealth and lifestyles...given the chance, how many of them would turn down the chance to switch places? THAT is something I'd love to know.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    If the person did not loan his money, which means he would not make $50K without lifting a finger, then the working person would not be able to borrow any money.

    If you believe that charging interest is evil and should not be allowed, then you believe in communism, or at least that is one of their beliefs.

    Making money is not evil.

    The redistribution of wealth, means taking money away from some and giving it to others.

    Suppose we take all of the money away from those who have lots of money and give it to the "working" people?

    Then the wealthy would be poor and there is not going to be enough money to distribute to all of the working people so some are still going to be poor.

    What happens then is that no one will work, because there is no reward for labor.

    If you work your money is taken from you, and if you don't work the government will give you money.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Every time you purchase something you redistribute your "wealth".

    Except The difference is NO ONE is Forcing anyone to get a loan, or purchase a thing. It is all done by choice.

    The Governments Idea is one of Forced Wealth Redistribution, If I work hard and EARN My money, I should Not Be Punished for being Successful. All that will do is cause me to work less so I am not punished no one will benefit form that decision, not me and definitely NOT the Government.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Brian
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    I don't support any artificially created wealth distribution. How the market sees fit to direct capital is something else entirely.

    In your example of course you seem to not want the bank to pay the depositor for the right to use his money. Is that depositor richer than the bank? So the rich evil bank should get to use deposited money for free and make money off of that?..

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    Why do you're saying adverse black human beings. Do you mean to signify their are not any adverse white human beings or that one and all black certainly everyone seems to be adverse. do no longer make the political race approximately race. This economic equipment is hurting, black and white alike. Redistributing wealth does no longer mean taking from the wealthy and giving to the adverse. It needless to say ability conserving probability for all. while you're in actuality black and adverse, ask God to bless you with a activity. do no longer feed into turning out to be branch in this u . s . between black and white, wealthy and adverse, woman and male, east and west. Use uncomplicated experience. a house divided won't stand.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • where do you think they get the money to make these loans..So you should be able to take a loan and not pay interest on it?People put there money in the bank, stock market ETC to make money...what is wrong with that?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    yes, you can either work for money, or have money work for you.

    it all depends on your attitude toward money. "have a dollar, spend 2 dollars" as opposed to "have a dollar, save a dollar".

    it makes sense that those who abide by the second option end up being rewarded with interests every year, isn't it. To me, it makes perfect sense.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It seems a ton of people on the right think wealth redistribution in corporations that don't pay the taxes they're required, or given free rides by "right to work" states, in free land, factories and tax free industry.

    Source(s): en
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Wealth redistribution requires an unwilling participant. So.. unless there is somebody forcing people to go get loans, you really have no point here.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.