MyFox
 

douglaschick0's Blog

by douglaschick0 from Denver

Last Post 29 days, 7 hours Ago


The Rich are Richer
Feb 3, 2008 | 5:50 PM
Category: News
Report This Post

Making the Rich Richer

On a construction site, during lunch, over 30 years ago; I sat beside my dad, on the ground, and listened while the other construction workers debated on how to disturb rich people's money. One said that he would take away all the wealth from all the rich and divide it among all the people. Another said that he would only take all the foreigners wealth and divide it because they were not American's, while even another said he would take all the money, cars, and expensive homes, sell them and then divide all the proceeds. My dad laughed out loud and said, "It wouldn't matter. You can take every penny they own, divide it equally among all the citizens in this country, giving everyone that exact same amount, and the rich would have it all back again within a year."

They all grunted and disagreed. He then continued;

 

"if you don't have the initiative to make the money, you certainly don't have the initiative to keep it. The first thing that everyone would do is go out and buy. You would fill you new homes with, new furniture, and new kitchen ware, and buy new cars for your new garages. You would buy all the stuff that you don't need, but always wanted, until every penny has been returned to its true owners. And after every penny is gone, you would have homes and cars that you could not afford, and then you would sell them at a much lower values until it was all gone. Then the rich would be even richer, and we would all be back here a year later, finishing this building."

So the government knows what they are talking about with this new stimulus package. 

24 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 24
Page 1 of 2
1
2
 Last
AlwaysaSceptic read my blog
Feb 4, 2008 | 7:55 AM

Really?

Well I concur with the dad! He knows what he’s talking about… But the government knowing what they are doing with money is a huge joke!

The BEST thing the government could do is discontinue any DOUBLE taxation, i.e.: capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes, and so on.

Sadly, we all know they will not do that.
MileHighPatriot read my blog view my photos
Feb 4, 2008 | 6:18 PM

Really good story. Everyone would LoVE to take the big bad rich person's money and Robin Hood it to the poor... dumb.

I never got a job from a poor man.

I do think this stimulous package will stimulate the economy though.... the point IS to get the 'poorer' people to spend.
drerunner read my blog
Feb 4, 2008 | 8:06 PM

Some one help me understand this, please! We give money to the poor -who cant afford (at least I think) to buy allot of stuff anyway.My government tells me this everyday by adding on more wlefare programs. So it must be true! We give them a measly 600$ to do what? ( If you are dumb enough) well to go out and buy a flat screen TV . Well, last I check, flat screens cost an average 3000$ . That's along ways from 600$. What will 600$ bucks do ? Is this some joke? Does it go like this , if 325,000 million Americans spend 600$ bucks, then our economy will grow $$$$$$$$$ ? What is going on here? Will 600$ bucks really help the American people and the economy? Will someone please explain how???
cicero read my blog
Feb 4, 2008 | 8:47 PM

that is wrong with the government today how sad and it will continue on to the next leader with no hope
MileHighPatriot read my blog view my photos
Feb 4, 2008 | 8:54 PM

I don't think there are 325 mil Americans... but when I said poor (not that you were responding to me) I meant me, maybe you. Anyone who makes less than ~84k/yr.

If only 116mil get a 600.00 bonus, and only 10% (~11.5 mil)of those spent all of it on 'stuff' (not just flat screen TVs, but diapers, shampoo, dinner and a movie, gasoline, an oil change, a road trip, basic every day commodities), that's $6,960,000,000 to stimulate the economy. That's not chump change when you're talking about money that was unexpected and unprojected.
cicero read my blog
Feb 4, 2008 | 9:00 PM

that would not stimualate anything at 7 billion we spent that already plus on a war.
MileHighPatriot read my blog view my photos
Feb 4, 2008 | 9:14 PM

Nothing huh? On a whole war this amount has been spent? A WHOLE war?? Think about what you're saying. You don't have to be an economist to know that that would def stimulate positively the economy. 7 bil in our American marketplace is big.
cicero read my blog
Feb 4, 2008 | 11:07 PM

yes but when it is spent on something other than good or in real needed areas and it is gone faster then made it is not positive and you dont have to be a economist to know that
911truthCO read my blog view my photos
Feb 4, 2008 | 11:10 PM

MHP - 7 bil is nothing compared to 17 tril per year to be in Iraq and Afganistan-

Dougchick - cute story - your point might be taken serious if they didnt print dollar bills out of thin air.

Its not the gov - its the Fed, who's only 1/2 gov. the other 1/2 is private bankers. They tinker to keep us afloat enough to keep us consuming and spending.... to keep us dependant on them with out recession

What ever you voluntary tax payers do with your "stimulus".... DONT buy from China... or anhywhere else not made in USA for that matter.....
MileHighPatriot read my blog view my photos
Feb 4, 2008 | 11:35 PM

911... how can be the wars be costing 17 tril if the new proposed budget is only 3.1 tril? Check your math.

What you guys don't understand is that this would be 7 bil (conservatively speaking) that wasn't in consumers' hands... and businesses cash registers. It will def work.

911, completely right on the don't buy from China. Agree with you on the printed paper dollars... they rep debt.... although I thought the Fed was completely pvt? Rockafeller being one of those owners...?
911truthCO read my blog view my photos
Feb 5, 2008 | 12:01 AM

oops, sorry... i meant 17 mil per day... which is what I thought the military is spending in the ME (keep me honest here) Which equates to way too many zeros for me to comprehend at the moment.

i too thought the fed was 100% private (thats how it started anyway) but the current sources such as wiki and the fed's own website are stating 50/50. so, for the sake of argument....

yes Rockafeller and Rothschild are the big players in the fed... among others. I'll try to find the top ten shareholder list i had once... its scary how many are NOT American.
911truthCO read my blog view my photos
Feb 5, 2008 | 12:05 AM

10 Primary stockholders of the Federal Reserve

1. The Rothschilds – London
2. The Rothschilds – Berlin
3. The Lazard Brothers – Paris
4. Israel Seiff – Italy
5. Kuhn-Loeb Company – Germany
6. The Warburgs – Amsterdam
7. The Warburgs – Hamburg
8. Lehman Brothers – NY
9. Goldman & Sachs – NY
10. The Rockefellers - NY
AlwaysaSceptic read my blog
Feb 5, 2008 | 6:30 AM

MileHighPatriot
Yes, it will help a little while for the short term.

A better plan would be to CUT DOUBLE TAXATION! Another thing that would help would privatize Social Security… This Country would see a BOOM like no other in WORLD HISTORY!!! I guess all the talk about CHANGE is just that… TALK! At least Bush took this small step but pray the next President look at taking measures for long term!
MileHighPatriot read my blog view my photos
Feb 5, 2008 | 10:30 AM

911... ya, i've seen that list before. It all links back to the Bank of Rome, doesn't it?

Always, you're absolutely right... Repubs are basically procrastinators... let's throw money at it and see if we can make it go away... or let's throw money at it and shut the people up for a bit... while dems' only solution is more taxes. It won't be until a financial collapse happens that we actually get our act together.

There are so many [useless luxuries] things the can cut or at least consolidate... a small example would be local govn't workers who do the bare minimum, if that, and have crazy high salaries.. unnecessary or building or crappy building (roads and bridges mostly).
drerunner read my blog
Feb 5, 2008 | 10:32 AM

All of you guys presented excellent points. MH -I was probably a little off on the numbers, thanks.. BUT SERIOUSLY FOLKS , It's a shame our government and leaders are refusing to consider everything we are taught from at the age of two. 1. what is the most logical thing to do? and or 2., What is the most common sense thing to do? It seems that these two key factors have become "somewhat" abandoned when it comes to what our government and our leaders are currently doing about our economically and social future. There must be a reason behind this.. Would one of you gentlemen please explain ? Am I wrong here? If so, please correct me! I mean, I supported and still support our president ( I would never vote for the leftist politician in America -Obama or even Hillary -the socialist) but saying immigrants who come here(mainly from Mexico) are very important to our economy is hard for me to comprehend. How can we be a global competitive society when it look like 40 % of our work force will be based on unskilled labor. How can the ameircan labor force be completive ,no less productive. How can 30 % illegal population be productive to our economy when they are sending up to 40-70% opf their income back to Mexico. Can someone help me here?
Page 1 of 2
1
2
 Last


Write your comment below:




douglaschick0

My name is Douglas Chick, I am an IT director for a national healthcare group, and an author of computer books, and creator of the computer networking, www.TheNetworkAdministrat
or.com

Member Since: 1/25/2008


 

View All Photos


RSS: XMLWhat is RSS?