Abolish Billionaires

Bruce

Well-Known Member
#1
This is a new idea I just read about. The argument is that billionaires are irredemiably corrupted by their obscene wealth and no good for anybody comes from failing to tax then down to a more reasonable level of great wealth.
I like the argument. How can you have democracy with billionaires around?
But how much wealth should be the limit?
 

old man emu

Well-Known Member
#2
An interesting question, especially in the context of Judeo-Christian and Islamic teachings versus all the other spiritually-based life-styles. The Jewish and Christian condemnation relates to avarice and greed rather than money itself. A tale about Rabbi Avraham Yehoshua Heshel of Apt (1748–1825), rabbi in Iasi, recounts that he, who normally scorned money, had the habit of looking kindly on money before giving it to the poor at Purim, since only in valuing the gift could the gift express love of God.

The King James Version shows 1 Timothy 6:10 to be:
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
One of many verses on the subject in the Islamic Holy Book says, " I bid you to refrain from avarice, for it is the garment of indigence and the bridle that is used to drive one towards every [type of] vileness."

So, it would seem that within these cultures, it is acceptable for a person to amass wealth, provided that getting wealth is not the persons sole raison d'etre. The logical sequiter is that having amassed wealth, without avarice, what is one to do with it?

Since ancient times wealthy persons have used money to buy the support of the less wealthy (bread and circuses); to raise monuments to secure their immortality (triumphant arches, mausoleums), to appease their gods (temples), and even philanthropy. In Victorian times, many successful business men spent a lot of money to properly house their workers and to provide the means for the workers to have a better life (night schools, support of popular music, seas-side trips).

In modern times, with the secularisation of Society, we look to Governments to ensure that to less well-to-do get their share of the Nation's GDP. We have seen, however, a plethora of examples in which those to whom we have entrusted the power to govern us, have fallen victim the to vice of avarice. Even the high moral values of Socialism and Communism have been shown to have feet of clay when power falls into the hands of the few.

How much wealth is enough? About the same numerical value as the length of a piece of string.

To support a rising standard of living, things have to be produced and sold. Perhaps a brake could be put on prices the end user pays. But that would also mean a brake on what the employer pays for the worker's expertise, labour and time. That germ of avarice in all of us would not accept that.
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
#3
IF everything you do has to make a profit for you, that shapes the way you live, totally. Put another way If there's nothing in it for you(money wise) you are nowhere to be seen.. I've met people like that and they are DIFFERENT and not particularly NICE. They will take what you GIVE them and SELL it back to you if they can. Relationships are based upon what you can DO for THEM. Not real friendship.. A double standard is part of the deal. They think you are less rich because you are stupid or they are superior and entitled to be high class. Money and conspicuous consumerism is NOT CLASS. Its actually quite CRASS. Having possessions you didn't make, design or relate to are just acquisitions often for the sole purpose of impressing others. showing OFF in short. This shows an innate issue with" self worth". and a need to compensate with TOYS and finery, mixing conspicuously with the "Have Arrived" Mutton dressed as Lamb , set where the worse than death mortifying situation is to arrive where someone else has an identical dress to yours. or his EX turns up looking stunning. with a really" rich and famous" partner, noticeably more so than YOU. Most would give a lot to be away from such situations, but you are "expected " to be SEEN there If you are "anyone".. Quality of life has no place there. It's a jungle. full of creepy creatures, that eat their young. Nev
 
Last edited:

Yenn

Well-Known Member
#4
The recently reported on royal commission into the banks shows up the money grubbing of "billionaires".
I have money invested in some banks, including NAB and also other industries. My reasoning is that I need income for my retirement. My wife has just this moment told me that the Commonwealth Bank shares have paid us $31000 over the years. Also that NAB is not as good. Even so I am not living the good life, but just getting by.
In contrast, the directors of all the companies I am invested in are paying themselves massive fees. The management, such as CEOs are getting probably more in a year than I earned in a working life as salary. Then on top of that they will get the same again as bonus, which is only for doing what they are paid for anyway.
I was very happy to see that the fat cats at the top of NAB have gone. Ken Henry was on TV and said that the directors couldn't be sure that they were working within the law, or words to that effect. that says to me that company directors are either incompetent, or more likely corrupt.
I look forward to some of those named by the royal commission being charged and convicted in the courts. That would go some way to looking after the shareholders who are appalled by what has been done to their businesses.
I don't think the religions have much credibility in their behaviour, compared to what they preach.They are running the worlds biggest insurance business and they never pay a dividend.
 

Marty_d

Well-Known Member
#5
I hate to have to remind the conservatives on here, but the last Labor government tried to regulate financial advisors by ensuring they made decisions in the best interests of the customer.
Tony Abbott's government rolled that back.
Then the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison government pushed back against the idea of the royal commission for ages, had to be dragged into it kicking and screaming.
The LNP also supported bank super over industry super, even though industry super outperformed the bank offerings in almost every case.
Meanwhile they're rabid supporters of the corrupt Adani company and the very banks and financial institutions that have been found to have engaged in theft.

The message is - unless you're a billionaire, the LNP is NOT your friend.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#7
"the directors of all the companies I am invested in are paying themselves massive fees. The management, such as CEOs are getting probably more in a year than I earned in a working life as salary. Then on top of that they will get the same again as bonus, which is only for doing what they are paid for anyway."
The worst was the bank CEO that was paid $53 million per year. then took an early pass & a big golden handshake, UNDISCLOSED amount.
Even the NRMA CEO has taken a large share portfolio, even tho it's member's were having their shares reduced.
spacesailor
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
#10
No human being is so talented or special, they should accept that amount of reward without acute pangs of conscience.. Can they honestly look in the mirror and say" I earned that."? It's pure stinking unadulterated greed, nothing less... They and their ilk also try to keep a cap on other's wages at every opportunity. as well as robbing their customers, like common thieves, secretly for years.. You pinch something you are a thief.. The premeditated and deliberateness of it means it's far worse than If you are starving and pinch an apple. Nev
 

old man emu

Well-Known Member
#11
What about the hypocrisy of Pop Stars who are swimming in money accumulated from the widow's mites of the economically depressed whose cruel situations the Pop Stars use as the fodder for their song lyrics? You don't see the Pop Stars using their excess money to improve the lot of their fans.
 
#14
so what some are saying that a couple of my mates should not have shelled out the 120 thousand and a 140 thousand for their childrens weddings
that the same two mates should not own an aircraft or have the latest bmw or have a 150 thousand yatch or own a open water racing boat
own their homes
they are the ones that keep the ecomeny going not the dole bluggers that are to stupid to do anything and want the gov to bring them down neil
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
#15
How much tax do they pay,. and have they ever avoided paying something to someone they owe by going bankrupt, or ever committed a crime or made a false statement on a contract, to obtain some of that money..Neil? .. Nev.
 

red750

Well-Known Member
#16
And what about Clive Palmer? Ripped off his Queensland workers, moved his business to NZ,suing the gov't for millions, and registers his bizjet in the Cayman Is.Did stuff all while he was in parl't, bragging about all the things he claims to have done, and the other idiots who got into the Senate couldn't wait to ditch him.
 

red750

Well-Known Member
#17
Another group who earn way more than they deserve are sportsmen, especially soccer players, like the guy who crashed into the English Channel.
 

Marty_d

Well-Known Member
#18
so what some are saying that a couple of my mates should not have shelled out the 120 thousand and a 140 thousand for their childrens weddings
that the same two mates should not own an aircraft or have the latest bmw or have a 150 thousand yatch or own a open water racing boat
own their homes
they are the ones that keep the ecomeny going not the dole bluggers that are to stupid to do anything and want the gov to bring them down neil
"Dole bludgers" spend 100% of their money in the local economy because they have to, to live.
The rich spend a minor proportion of their money in the local economy. The rest goes to shares, investments, overseas houses, luxury items, and keeping lawyers and accountants in fodder.
You have billionaires with more money than they could spend in a lifetime, but suggest higher taxes on them - or even death duties - and see them squeal. (And lobby their mates in the LNP).
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#19
" You don't see the Pop Stars using their excess money to improve the lot of their fans. " BOB GELDOF" live aid concert, : Madison Square Garden Concert in NEWYORK in 1971, which were organized by George Harrison and Ravi Shankar .
And dozens more.

"not the dole bluggers that are to stupid to do anything "
Those stupid sods ARE paying tax. And get no help or sympathy when they get turned away from work as too deshabille (spelling) appearance.
AND the Rich pay out $3000 for a suit. Then claim TAX deductible.
Not only that but it's well known for those dole bluggers to be ripped off & not payed the full rate in their wages, just keeping the Rich in control of the poor.
How do I know, Before I was "Enlightened" My home address was a CARAVAN PARK so NO jobs available. Change of address to the "street address, and I had a pick of five jobs.
At the dole dole office, a "Manager" was paid more than "the dole blugger" to keep up his employment prospects. And we bluggers were told to stop shouting about it , or they will set the police on us.
REAL CLASS DISTINCTION, All smiles for the well off, Sheet for the blugger.
spacesailor
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#20
Yep the poor, unemployed and underemployed get screw every way possible.

The ability to live of the new start is almost impossible but they refuse to lift it to close to the pension which is a lot more.

Worse is that they have to deal with jobsearch providers that are paid $14,000 a year per unemployed person to " help" you find a job. So for 15 mins every fortnight of absolutely bugger all help they get more than $500, almost what the dole is for every two weeks.

A absolute rort and all the time the rich bastards complain they can't find workers so must import them and pay them bugger all.

Trying to compete for a job has become a race to the bottom.
And the government unemployment figures changed under Howard to mean 1 hour a week means you are employed. This artificially reduces the real unemployment rate, ie people searching for work.

"The rich get richer and the poor get the picture" Midnight Oil.
 
Top Bottom