Bitcoin Forum

1) in NYC 5000 people out of 8.4 million pay 50% of all city taxes

2) in California 150,000 pay 50% of state taxes

3) in America the top 1% pay 40% of all federal taxes.

No other country rips off the rich like we do in America but ,sadly, the joke is on us because when you take incentive and capital from your most productive citizens and give to your least productive, ie., liberal bureaucrats and free loaders, everyone suffers in a poor economy whose heart has been cut out.

hang in there

I'd argue that isn't the whole picture. The government compensates them handsomely for it. In some countries, corporations are actually expected to stick to the law. The money's just a bribe for non-tangible gain, maybe just to ensure execs stay out of prison, so accepted in the US that high school government classes often cover the Iron Triangle in the same way as if they were going over the reasoning for having a bicameral legislature, now.

The top 1% of Americans also get 43% of the nations income yearly, and only 19% of their income is derived from actual work (wages and salaries)

    The bottom 80% only pull a pathetic 17% of the nations income, and 97.24% of that is from actual work (wages and salaries).

    The idea that we "rip off the rich" is completely and totally retarded. Nowhere else in the world do the rich have it as well as they do in America.

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

That is why governments pass laws to benefit the rich, so they make more money and bribes the government with taxes. It is the same with any other country.

A simple divide and conquer method to pitch the population against each other from the governing class (politician).

We now have many racial groups now against each other, class group against each other and ideologies and religions fighting each other.

Its a general notion that every government the world over enriches itself from taxes generated from the rich thus make appropriations that go in favor of the rich that isn't debatable.But the fact still remains that the poor masses bear the burden from most of this laws since they find it hard to meetup with any such laws created due to their status. 

We all suffer when anti American liberals steal capital from our most heroic and productive citizens. The more liberals steal venture capital the fewer ventures we have. That means fewer jobs and slower economic growth. A child could understand, just not a brainwashed liberal.

You keep talking about "stealing" venture capitol. We dont tax venture capital, we tax income, and venture capital is typically achieved through some type of securitized mezzanine financing facility. The only way your argument makes sense is if you wanted to argue that by taxing the income of the wealthy you are decreasing the available capital of some hypothetical angel investor, which is what many/most Americans think of when they hear "venture capitalist". As we are discussing in another thread, most americans are ignorant. When it comes to venture capital, angel investors are almost unheard of, and are certainly unheard of on any measurable level. That is just not the way such things are financed anymore.

Even traditional angel investors do not fit the mold here anymore. Today angel investors pool their capital and share research. Your typical angel investment pool is never actually used as venture capital. Instead they organize a security offering and use their capital to insure the resulting securities against default. It is a cheap way to leverage their money.

The other financing you typically see from angel investors (and probably the most common anymore) is providing the capital to make an IPO, often with the marketing to go with it it. Say you have an idea, have proven the idea is sound, but lack the capital to bring it to market. If the idea has any merit, there is a better than average chance that you can pick up an angel investor (which is usually going to actually be a pool unless you are stuck in FFF hell). They help fund an IPO and pay to market your IPO. You essentially pay your angel investor in stock, which they sell at the beginning of the IPO. Typical return on a transaction like this is 20-30x. If you have picked a good angel investor they are now out of it and you have ample capital to take your product to market....or pay yourself lavishly until the money runs out and then hand the whole mess to the bankruptcy court and let them work it out...whatever.

The financial world is FAR, FAR more complex than your dad is telling you. In the real world over 96% of expansion capital in this country is newly generated by our fractional reserve banking system. Another 1.5% is self funded. You are essentially arguing that we should base our tax policy on 2.5% of expansion capital.

That is dumb.

And frankly history makes you look silly in your claims. George Washington paid more in taxes than wealthy Americans have in the last 10 years. Literally. Wealthy Americans have NEVER paid less in taxes as a total percentage of assets than they have in the last decade. Where the hell are all the jobs? Where are all the new ventures that should be pupping up due to their obscenely low (historically) tax rate???

At the same time, the fastest absolute growth in this country ever took place immediately following WWII. At that point the wealthy were txed 90% on yearly income over $1 million. WE HAD A 90% TAX BRACKET, and that was when our nation grew the most. We literally grew so fast, and became so wealthy, that our entire nation has been living off that wealth since the late 70s.

What a load of lies.

By what standard do you judge that wages and salaries are the only measure of real work?

It sounds like someone who has never made an intellectual effort in their life.

Further physical labor or even mental labor is not the measure of what a person deserves, what people agree to give them in trade is that measure. Whether you think they deserve it or not is not your decision it is the individual decisions of everyone who trades with these people.

The idea that you rip the rich off is totally founded by the simple fact that you are taking their money by force.

If you did that too the poor you would be ripping them off too.

The truth is that it has virtually nothing to do with tax rates. Fractional banking and relative loose securitization laws ensure that there will be ample money out there for start-up and expansion purposes, and the wealthy will invest in things that will make them money, and not invest in things that will lose them money, regardless of the tax rate. Nobody says "Gee....I would make a million dollars on this investment, but if I am going to have to pay 32% taxes on that million dollars SCREW IT, I will put that money in CDs at 1.2% instead". That is just not reality.

We are trying to run a capitalist system with a wealth distribution that absolutely precludes the possibility of a capitalist system. In order for a capitalist system to work, the majority of wealth MUST rest in the middle and lower classes. This is not optional. You simply cannot have a capitalist system unless this is true. Exactly how much of that wealth must rest in the middle and lower class is a matter of some debate, with different economist arguing in favor of anywhere from 63% to 70% of wealth being held by the bottom 80% of your people.

That is simply what you MUST HAVE in order for capitalism to work. It is quite literally the cornerstone of capitalism and why capitalism is considered by most people to be the fairest, most just economic system out there.

So, what we have here in the US IS NOT CAPITALISM. By definition it is NOT capitalism. But we keep trying to manage it as if it is. IF this was actually a capitalist system your argument might have had some merit 30 years ago, before complex securitization and derivatives were widely used.

Even if it was legit capitalism there would be a elite of big money holders then 99% of poor people like in BTC.

Yea...it requires a lot of intellectual effort to hold treasury notes.

Sorry but no, the guy who gets up in the morning and heads into the office and works for 8 hours is working...even if what he does is primarily, or even completely, intellectual. The guy who calls his fund manager once a month is not working. He is living off investment income.

And nobody was talking about what anybody "deserves". We were talking about taxation, which is required to pay to maintain the infrastructure that allows us to make money.

Today your argument is just plain silly. Remember the financial crash we just had, caused by terrible loan quality....hundreds of thousands of dollars being loaned to people who could not demonstrate that they had ever paid a bill on time or held a job? That entire situation was caused by the fact that the top 1% has essentially run out of things to invest in. They loaned money to crack whores because they just really did not have anywhere to put that money.

That is where our massive, economy wide bubbles are coming from. Our stock market valuations are absolutely insane. Bonds that should be paying 27% interest are paying 6%. It is classic investment inflation, and it is only cause by, and has only ever BEEN caused by overabundance of idle investment capital.

Let's put this into numbers using IRS data: SOI Tax Stats - Individual Statistical Tables by Size of Adjusted Gross Income
http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats---Individual-Statistical-Tables-by-Size-of-Adjusted-Gross-Income
Middle Class:
People with taxable income around $60k a year will pay an average tax rate of 15% with around 1% of their income being taxed as capital gains.

Percent of income from Salaries and wages: 80%
Percent of income from Partnership or S Corp: 1%

Rich Class:
People with taxable income over $10 million a year will pay an average tax rate of 25% with around 50% of their income being taxed as capital gains rates (most of it at 15%).

Percent of income from Salaries and wages: 19%
Percent of income from Partnership or S Corp: 22%
(I put both but I doubt you can combine them since it is unlikely you have a partnership AND another job to where you net over $10 million a year. It is more likely you have either a partnership where you split the earnings or you get a salary).


In other words, the majority of TAXABLE income from the super rich is taxed at 15% which is the same rate a married filing jointly family is taxed at who makes $60k. The taxes paid are flatter than people think.

Honestly though, the people getting hosed the most, in my humble opinion, are those in the upper middle class who can't afford a good tax accountant but earn enough (mostly from wages) to be in a higher tax bracket. Those in the 100k-500k range. I'm not saying they are suffering but they get the breaks like the 10mill club gets.

Time to cut the BS and face the fact that the rich aren't paying enough, mostly on their "investments". In fact, I'd be willing to compromise and say the first 10% of your total income will be taxed at capital gains rates and every investment type income after that will be taxed at 50%. To be fair, we can tax none-investment type business income that employ more than 3 people (yeah, no getting around the rule) at 25%.

SEE! I'm for "small business" and the middle class.

Going all the way back to Smith in 1776 a "vibrant" middle class is required for any capitalist system to work. That is a large part of what makes capitalism unique, and why it is generally considered to be the most just economic system. For it to work the majority of your money has to be out there in the economy among the middle and lower classes circulating. If you end up in the situation where we are, with the vast majority of the money concentrated in the hands of a few, the system breaks down.

Look at the recent economic crisis. The entire crisis was essentially a recognition that pricing discovery had broken down completely. At the end of the day any free market system at its basest level is nothing BUT a price discovery mechanism. If price discovery has broken down your entire economy is essentially a farce...it is not doing its primary job.

In this case the break down was essentially caused by investment level hyperinflation. Econ 101...too much money chasing too few goods leads to inflation. The same thing happens with investments as happens with a loaf of bread at the corner supermarket. If you end up with too much capital in your top 20%, where that money tends to be put into investments instead of spent against goods and services, you end up in a situation where the real economy stagnates due to lack of wealth while investments get expensive because there is so much capital chasing so few investment opportunities.

In the past this has been self correcting to some degree because of the limited investment opportunities. Today we have the technology to create and track a multi trillion dollar derivatives market which allows us to artificially leverage the relatively few investment opportunities out there that are actually backed by hard assets.

It will eventually end up "correcting" anyway, the odds of our economy surviving it are just FAR worse than they have been in the past.

Anyway, taxing the rich more is simply a way to get us out of this fiscal mess we are in. It is basically impossible to cut over 50% of our budget out to balance and even if we did the job losses from that would drive tax revenue way down, sink us into a depression for sure, and require us to cut again to balance the budget. Why cant' we all just suck it up and pay what the average American had to pay during our most prosperous times in the 50s-60s?

I want to note that I'm not even sure why you arguing for a "Robin Hood" type tax system. The argument against taxing the rich always boils down to "we shouldn't tax the rich to give to the poor". Well I don't want to speak for you but I bet he generally agrees. Most people agree some sort of welfare is always needed to hope those who would never be able to help themselves (such as the mentally handicapped) or those who are down on their luck; as an example.

Hell not I am not arguing for a robin hood type system. I have no desire to tax the rich and give it to the poor. I want to tax the rich and PAY OUR BILLS WITH IT.

We can make a logical argument for it (the wealthy are the only ones who can AFFORD to pay) or we can make a moralistic argument (they hold 90% of the wealth, derived 90% of the benefit, they should pay 90% of the bill) or we can just shrug and say "sometimes you just get screwed". I don't really care. I don't want my children to have to grow up in a third world country, and that is where America is headed if we don't do something about our fiscal problems.

This is why economic stupidity annoys me so much right now. We have serious, serious problems and by all accounts we have a very limited window in which to fix them. This is SERIOUS with nothing less than the very survival of our nation at stake. This is bar none the biggest clear and present danger that the US has ever faced.

Alternatively you can take the Steve Forbes approach which is to drive us off a cliff while yelling "See you in Hell !!!".

Seriously though, this is our number one threat at the moment and it probably was the true number threat back in the early 2000s as well. You seem to think Americans somewhat get it, I'm not so convinced. Just because 80% of people think we have a problem doesn't mean they are willing to fix it or can identify the problem. I mean come on, you basically have 50% of people that want to balance the budget AND are willing to cut nothing and not pay a dime more to do it. Another 30% are only willing to cut defense. I suppose they are counting on God to swoop in and save them but I got a hard time believing the big man is a fan of selfish stupidity.

There is really not time to listen to nitwits argue that decreasing taxes will increase revenue when that theory has been absolutely, unquestionably, and unarguably proved WRONG a decade ago.

Just today all ten (the rest are dead) former chairmen of the White House Council of Economic Advisers issued a letter calling on politicians to adopt the deficit reduction committees recommendations, citing the current deficit as a "severe threat that calls for serious and immediate action". They predict an economic crisis that "Dwarfs the crisis of 2008".

And we have politicians pandering to stupid people who are arguing in favor of fairy tale economics.

The situation is self evident. No reasonable person can take a look at our fiscal situation and draw any conclusion except that our nation is in mortal danger. I guess I just feel like facing those consequences, people should actually try to understand the problem as opposed to just spewing ridiculous nonsense. It is not like these people are even advancing valid alternative theories. They are just spouting gibberish and the XXXXXX in washington cant see past the next election, so they pander to these imbeciles.

It's just the halo effect. Rich = positive halo.

Love see no poor or rich,people like you made this things up and you are the ones who suffer.

Because they think they can become friends with the rich guys and they think they will be nice to them, but they dont see that they are cunts.

because you think they deserve it, instead the poor are stupid or something, instead they are just not lucky enough

Way too legit. This upsets rich people, they think are special butterflies when they are just lucky.

Not all the rich people were lucky and not all the poor people were unlucky, the skill also matters.

Define skill.

A rich guy who is not smart enough will wile away his entire fortune. A fool and his money are soon parted.

tell me more about the skill of the sons of the rich guy, there aren't new rich guys, we are talking about the established one, those are all lucky

Ability to gain skill and perform great = predisponed by genetic and environmental factors = aka LUCK.

A person with a lot of skills can teach his skills to his son, and be a good roll model to him so his son can understand the value of hard work and perseverance.

There are a lot of family businesses when the children ran the business that the parents used to run because the parents were able to give their children enough exposure to the ins and outs of how to properly run the business and taught them the skills necessary to do so.

I know many poor friends who have nice skills in their job but without the right contacts they can't be promoted.

Wealthy family in general do not keep the wealth for more than a few generation. Wealthy kids tend to be spoiled and parents having marriage problems which keep propagating into future generation.

Rich people were also once poor who got enough opportunities and good luck to get through the process of evolving through poor to rich

What bills do you want the taxes of the rich to pay?  i guarantee that unless other STRICT spending measures are put in place 1st any additional money that is brought in will be spent in an unwise and non-beneficial way.  i'm middle class.  I work hard and enjoy a modest income.  but i hate paying taxes as much as the next guy.  specifically when I see tax money wasted (and we all know there are many ways to waste tax money) it burns me up.  I can only imagine if my tax bill were higher how much more "burned up" I would be by my money going to wasted things, REGARDLESS of how much I extra I was making/keeping.  people who dont get mad when money is wasted are bad people.  I work for my money and therefore want to see it go to good use, whether I'm the one spending it or not.  those of you that assume that the "rich" are not working for their money are blind.  I agree there are some who have money and are worthless (Kardashians anyone?) but like others have said if you have money and are a fool then it's only a matter of time before you lose it.  that's why we all hear stories of people that win the lottery and then are back in the broke house a few years later.  and it wasnt because now that they had money they decided to help the poor.  it was because they werent smart with the money.  if I were in charge of the lotteries I would make it mandatory to go through a certain number of hours of financial classes/consultation/etc before distributing amounts over 250000.  cause if by some sweet miracle i came in to 250000 i would be able to be debt free and do something I liked doing for a living (like teaching high school calculus) instead of being a computer consultant.  instead my older brother and I run a business that employs 18 total people and I make a good living doing something I dont really enjoy.  my younger brother, on the other hand, has good computer skills but WONT use them to make money and instead lives off the government or kindness (in other words ignorance) of strangers.  he says he doesnt enjoy it and it "hurts" him too much to do something he doesnt like doing.  too many of our "poor" are in fact lazy or spoiled as much/more so than the "rich kids" whom they despise.  i've spent 2 years living in a 3rd world country seeing how the real poor live, so forgive me for not having sympathy for most of America's "poor" cause they are in fact not poor in the least.

so take my tax money.  and while I wish it would be used for wise purposes - roads, infrastructure, small to moderate government, military, quality education (yeah right), services and help for the disabled, etc - dont expect me to pay more than I can get away with legally.  and am I going to feel guilty about eating a filet mignon now and then?  Hell no, cause I earned it.

/rant

I think this is a sterotype. I would stand by my above argument as to how wealth is passed onto generation from generation. if wealth does not get passed onto a rich person's children it will be because they are spoiled.

The riches have their ways to make sure their own needs will be fullfiled, also have the means to get all their rights(lawers, contacts, etc..). The poors don't have money to hire lawers and don't have organization.

It is not about love, it is about who have more ways to do stuff

You always have the option of setting up foundations/ trusts and leave the management of these trusts to professionals. Just give the descendants a portion of the returns from the trust. The descendants cannot ruin the corpus, but receive enough to live a comfortable life.

Democracy sucks. I wonder who would win if everyone got a number of votes in proportion to how much they have paid in direct taxes.

Why do you think that? People that pay a lot of taxes want less government interventionism (unless they are crony capitalists), not more.

A friend of mine always says "if life was a thing that money could buy, the rich gonna live and the poor gonna die , for a living dog is better than a dead lion''. it simply denotes that the rich get their way in relation to government and its provisions but the reverse is the case for the poor. 

you should compare the tax they pay to their income, not to the amount of people paying it.

because their income is WAY higher than the tax they pay.

It's much higher because they produce much more (as long as it's a free market, not a hampered one).

Ya... sucks to be rich. I guess you just have to cry yourselves to sleep in your huge mansions on top of piles of money.

Yeah but its still a joke. Most rich people i've ever meet are fund babbies. You have to be really stupid to fuck it up once you inherit.

47% of people in the US do not pay any federal income taxes. This is the bottom of the barrel when it comes to incomes. If you want to talk about people needing to pay their fair share of income taxes then how is it fair that the lazy do not have to pay any taxes while the hardworking and successful need to pay upwards of 1/3 of their income in taxes.

If they don't invest their money properly, they will lose it. It may take some decades, or even some generations, but they will lose it in the end if they don't invest it well.

Actually, most fund babies lose their money pretty fast. Just because they get the money for free they think its easy..

Its just how the world go round.

It works like this: I print 1 billion dollar for myself, hand in 1 million to government as tax, register an income of 2 million dollar, so that I have a tax rate of 50%. And I complain that the tax is too high   8)

Most of the rich people do not get their income through working, but money printing, directly or indirectly, depends on how close they are to the FED and large commercial banks

Because they earn so little (or nothing) to begin with. If you took money from them in tax, you'd just end up spending that same money back on them in social programs anyway.

Because of failo effect from poor people and halo effect from rich people.

Wealth accrued in a free market may only be accrued by pleasing customers as trade is voluntary.

So then the more money you have the more people you have pleased!

Wealthy = lots of money = lots of people pleased = lots of people like you.

Poor? = no money = no people pleased = you suck, up your game.

That's false. Money doesn't automatically make more money. Only money well invested, to please customers while making a profit, will make you richer. Take a look at a Forbes list from 30 years ago, and you'll find that you don't even know the majority of them.

Poor people can win money like anyone else, working and investing properly.

I think you missed what I was putting across. I said nothing about money making money. I am simply equating that someone is wealthy if they have a lot of money (or a high net worth as measured in money).

Because people is desperate and want to befriend the rich to get some benefits.

You do take away money from them...in the form of sales tax and other indirect taxes.

Inflation.

You can't say love poor and hate rich its liking and disliking.Love isn't limited to poor and rich.Liking and loving are different

Some just wasnt brought up nicely by their family

Because poor people is stupid and think they can get rich too with hard work  ::)

Because poor makes things harder, rich makes thing easy.

I guess the reason so many love the rich and hate the poor is because they feel as a rich person they can give more and people tend to love the people who can give more, especially when it comes to money. The poor never have as much meaning they are not so much use to them. I personally don't favourite either and treat everyone equally because it's not about how wealthy you are it's about who you are.

poor gets poorer, rich becomes richer.. Its what the society tells us today. We could not change that. Ever.

Poor people smell bad, rich peeps smell nice?

The trend was less poor since the industrial revolution; government actions changed that trend and is creating more and more poor with its regulation, tax and subsidiaries given to poor people

Its very sadly true Poor smell bad and rich peeps smell nice I have this bad experience many time in my real life

Rich people need poor people. Otherwise they cannot be what they are.

what they need poor people for

To pay them small so they can live big. ::)

Dexter44 meant that if we are all rich, nobody is rich because you can be rich if some people are not rich

I don't think we love the rich and hate the poor, we respect the rich that seems less dangerous in the day to day life because they are unlikely to rob you but to some extent we hate the rich and like the poor

Absolutely! They need poor people to make champagne and build Aston Martins and paint master-pieces to hang in their architectural castles! wait a second................. you need to be skilled as fuck to create that shit, and if your skilled, your not poor.

Yes expecially when talking about POS coins :D

Do you math?

Is your comment sarcasm? Can't tell if idiot or comic genius.... ???

The fast majority of the federal expenditures are either transfer payments to the lazy or otherwise benefit the poor. Very little of what the government spends it's money on is spent on things that benefit the rich/successful.

Granted a good portion of the federal budget does go to national defense, however this benefits everyone, but also makes it less necessary to institute a draft because we can invest in technology that allows us to have a smaller army (people with more wealth are generally exempt from the draft due to they usually fall into categories like them getting an education that prevent them from needing to serve).

Your point of view is interesting but the money that goes to the national defense is mostly wasted, heat up everyone against us and buy guns that will fall in our enemies hands

Because poor people want your money and you are naive enough to think rich people aren't greedy cunts.

Everyone wants money, both rich and the poor, and its never enough.
Make a poor man rich, and its most likely , he'll also want more.
The more u have, the more u crave for it.

Because they hate themselves. And I also don't mean all poor people. I mean the poor people who hate the rich. The ones that actually hate rich people are the ones who are too lazy to get out there and do something for themselves. They don't want to go to school, they don't want good education, they don't want to work hard. I don't know what they are expecting. I'm sorry but it takes SOMETHING to have a good life. It doesn't come free. I'm not rich. I'm too young to be rich anyway, but I hope to work really hard (just done with school) and make money someday. I just feel bad for people who are too lazy to do that.

I would disagree with this. Most of the money from national defense goes to long term defense systems like R/D for new fighter jets or missile defense systems (to prevent a nuclear attack against the US/NATO).

Try not to talk with bias people. If you know you are not accepted in the society then move on. Their opinion doesnt really matter.

Because its how the world moves.

It's simple
Because rich have a lot of money that can help government & other people who work for him/her
And people hate the poor, because they can't help anyone & make other people help him
People loves people who help him/her

But not every people hate the poor  :)

There are a lot of philanthropic guys out there.
While they still would be earning tons of money, they have started distributing their wealth.  :)

Yeah, so how does that refute his argument anyway. Poor people think they are going to get money by being nice to rich people. Poor people hate each other because they are competing to do favors for rich people. It's a sad reality we live in.

Poor people don't work, work for poor people or middle class, not for the rich

Rich are taking care of by millionaires that will then have middle class working for them and the Rich make their money selling services or products to the government or the poor with the help of the government

Poor people don't work? Poor people have no choice but to work...

I didn't say all poor people don't work I said : "Poor people don't work, work for poor people or middle class, not for the rich"

In The States and in Europe, you can easily not work without being rich : "The civilian labor force participation rate, at 62.7 percent, changed little in September. The employment-population ratio was 59.0 percent for the fourth
consecutive month."
Almost half the population doesn't work and among those who work a lot work part-time

created human purpose on earth is to be complementary to one another, every human being must have advantages and disadvantages, there are rich and some are poor, all to complement each other, it could be any rich people needed to help the poor, and the presence of the needed to pray for the rich, I hope it can last as long and lasting ...  ::)

Many times the poor choose not to work but instead rely on welfare from the government

May be possible in the developed world.
In most countries, social benefits are non-existent/insufficient and the poor have to work.

not happening in my country, most of the poor work from day to night while the rich " Gov. officials" rely on the peoples money to build their own private island, hotels, resort, and etc. the poor gets poorer while the rich gets richer

That only happen because the population let them get away with it. Can always vote the incumbent out if the population is not happy.

Gotta say I agree with OP. Flat tax is the only fair way. I thought we wanted a free market economy but yet will punish the hell out of the achievers. I am not rich but I do well and I hate what I have to pay now. Its no wonder why companies have to move companies out of the country and also choose not to live in the US as their "primary" residence.

All we need is love.. Love is all we need.

I doubt if there is any country which imposes a flat tax rate.  :)

Dangerous times when people group together to demand more pay rather than work harder.

Bitcoin is full of hustlers though. Love that shit!

 Abkhazia[28]    10%
 Albania[29][30][31]    10%
 Andorra[32]    10%
 Anguilla[33]    3%
 Belarus[31]    12%
 Belize[34]    25%
 Bolivia[31]    13%
 Bosnia and Herzegovina[35][36]    10%
 Bulgaria[31][37]    10%
 East Timor[38]    10%
 Estonia[31][39][40][41]    21%
 Georgia[31][41][42]    20%
 Greenland[43]    37 to 46% (depending on the municipality)
 Grenada[44]    30%
 Guernsey[31][45]    20%
 Guyana[46]    33.33%
 Hungary[31]    16%
 Jamaica[31]    25%
 Jersey[31][47]    20%
 Kazakhstan[31][48]    10%
 Kyrgyzstan[45][49]    10%
 Latvia[31][41]    25%
 Lithuania[31][41][50]    15%
 Macedonia[31][45][51]    10%
 Madagascar[31]    22%
 Mauritius[31][45]    15%
 Mongolia[52]    10%
 Montenegro[31][53]    9%
 Nagorno-Karabakh[54]    5%
 Poland    19%
 Romania[31][41]    16%
 Russia[31][41][55]    13%
 Saint Helena[56]    25%
 Saudi Arabia[31]    2.5% zakat (citizens of GCC countries)
20% income tax (foreigners)
 Serbia[31][57]    12%
 Seychelles[31]    15%
 South Ossetia[58]    12%
 Transnistria[59]    10%
 Trinidad and Tobago[31]    25%
 Turkmenistan[60]    10%
 Tuvalu[61]    30%
 Ukraine[31][41][62]    15%

Have you considered the fact that if everyone followed your shitty logic slavery would still be legal?

O goodness what a horrible world to imagine  ::)

That is not actually true. When unions are formed the market is distorted as the price of labor is artificially increased, and the demand of labor is artificially decreased as people who do not want to join a union will not work for a union company that does not have right-to-work laws.

If a company is not paying high enough wages then they will not be able to attract employees to work for them and would not be able to fill customer orders

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ8Kq1wucsk

this video explains alot about our economy and how it is broke down in classes and how having and not having money changes people...
i believe alot of this video not entirely true to the entire rich population, but just because someone drives a nicer car or has a bigger bank account does not make them more valuable than any other human... I feel more sorry for the people who spend their lives as slaves to money... if you have alot of money remember to stay humble and dont look down on the less fortunate.  And NO not everyone can do what this other person did and make millions, because not everyone has the same physical/mental/social capabilities as the next which is what makes the human race such a wide spread different on so many different levels... never let money go to your head you cant take it with you when you leave....

"This world is not my home, im just a passer through, my treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue"

rich = has the money, connection, power, that we can abuse and use.

poor = has nothing. Not necessarilty good people. nothing that we can use.

ie we love the rich because we are selfish and materialistic.

lol.

prove that you are selfish and materialistic. i dont believe you are rich!