quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Its not punishment thats a stupid thing to say. If you are rich you are in more of a position to help your society and why shouldn't they help the less fortunate? Plus the US is one of the most religious countries in the world and isn't this the Christian thing to do? (Islamic countries have a poor tax cos that is one of the five pillars of Islam - giving to the poor/charity)

I'm pretty sure all the rich ones wouldn't see it as a help for their society... In my eyes it is theft (or robbery, if that word doesn't ecisdt in english ) if you tax the riches more then the poor.

quote:

You mean "employee", either way, like I said above, its not about the responsibility, its about WORTH (that means who makes the most money for the company, not who has the potential to lose the most!)

Yes indeed, I meant that
I think the manager makes the most money... Without a manager, a company wouldn't get far. Without one employee? You just place a note in the paper and the next day you have a line standing in front of your door

quote:

Originally posted by Rhand I'm pretty sure all the rich ones wouldn't see it as a help for their society... In my eyes it is theft (or robbery, if that word doesn't ecisdt in english ) if you tax the riches more then the poor.

Do you think that the rich have a duty to help the poor? Or do you think the poor should be left to fend for themselves? And if you think the latter, tell me what consequences that would have for society...(something people advocating taxing the poor more have failed to elaborate on)

quote:

Yes indeed, I meant that I think the manager makes the most money... Without a manager, a company wouldn't get far. Without one employee? You just place a note in the paper and the next day you have a line standing in front of your door

Explain to me how a manager makes more money than a worker...do they make products? Do they sell products over the counter? Lets look at MacDonalds...lets say you have one manager and two supervisors, four chefs and five people on the tills. Who is making the money? The chefs and till operators right? There is no need whatsoever for the manager and less need for the supervisors (you turn upto work, flip some burgers and take the money for them, thats it, nothing more nothing less)

quote:

Originally posted by Rhand Yes indeed, I meant that I think the manager makes the most money... Without a manager, a company wouldn't get far. Without one employee? You just place a note in the paper and the next day you have a line standing in front of your door

without the workers it would get nowhere

___________________
Liverpool Champions of Europe 2005!


TA's NFL survival League winner 2006!

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Tax the poor more. That way we can slowly starve them all to death. Eventually there will be no more poor people and we can all live happily in an idealic society! Of course poverty is a relative measure so we’ll have to raise taxes on the neo-poor until they’re eliminated as well to ensure the propogation of happiness. Eventually my utopian society will simply consist of one really, really rich guy who lives in a dizzying state of bliss.

Can I live there too? We'll have to import everything obviously because we'll not have any plebs to make stuff, but it'll be cool the money we make from being rich will last forever.

___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.

A simplistic way of looking at the worker/manager relationship is manager > worker.

Which is very slightly true in terms of responcibility/education required (hence higher pay).

But an mangers job is actually to support (and manage) workers in their job make them able to do their job rather than to lord over them.

E.g. the guys pulling the coal out of the rock face have managers to support them and make it possible for them to pull the coal out of the face. In any business model that is a managers job to make the level below to be able to do their job and add value or support the level below that (managers very rarely add value, that is make money, they just make it possible for the people who do able to do their job) .

In the very vast amount of cases any added value in a transformation process is carried out directly at the worker level the rest of the business is just there to support them in that task.

EDIT:
In western countries we are moving closer to using less workers (and doing higher level stuff). But you still need lower level workers in for example service industies. And to entirely depend on other nations for raw materials (subject to supply and demand and hence price changes) is folly.

___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.

Last edited by Dervish on Apr-26-2005 at 21:53

Im not an economist, but what i have read and studied, i think it seems like a flat tax system is a good solution! Seem to work good in eastern europe and in new zealand. Lot less troubles and lot less taxes, esp for the middle class!

if we have an income tax at all, it should be a flat tax

___________________
Nathan Fake - Outhouse (Valentino Kanzyani Remix) || ID PLZ! PVD ID!!!
Disco and classical had sex while watching a sci-fi movie. Their child: trance.

Ok, for all the people who have said/voted for a flat tax, you have to say how you will make the deficit up (if you have a flat tax that is the same as the basic rate then you are gonna collect only a fraction of what you did before). You cant just say "flat tax" and leave it - what do you cut back on or what other tax do you raise? Or, if you plan to raise the basic tax rate you have to say what the effect on society would be - poverty, crime, etc, etc

Without the "managers", there would be no such jobs in the first place. The managers and owners of business create the jobs. They create the wealth. Employees work for them, not the other way around. Employees can quit and generally be readily replaced. However it is much more difficult to save a creature when you cut off the head.

See Prime Mover

I think your more meaning an "entrepreneur" who is one who starts a new business by seeing new oppertunities.

These days share holders own a buisness they perform no other function. Directors add value by providing tactical information to the business.

But managers simply manage thouse who are below them, passing directions down the chain or organising thouse below them.

The workers do the work which the managers organise which the directors have identified as work which will gain profit for the share holders.

___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Ok, for all the people who have said/voted for a flat tax, you have to say how you will make the deficit up (if you have a flat tax that is the same as the basic rate then you are gonna collect only a fraction of what you did before). You cant just say "flat tax" and leave it - what do you cut back on or what other tax do you raise? Or, if you plan to raise the basic tax rate you have to say what the effect on society would be - poverty, crime, etc, etc

In New Zealand, for example, only the richest tenth of households pay much more under the country's progressive income tax than they would under a 25% flat tax (see chart). Most of the redistribution in New Zealand is carried out on the other side of the government's ledger, by spending more money on poor people.



http://www.economist.com/displaysto...tory_id=3860731

Flat taxes doesnt necisairly need that the government makes less money. The rich know how to escape the taxes anyway, they know all the loopholes and so on, so they in fact pay a lot less than the middle class. With this system they pay equally as much as everyone else. This system also makes it a lot cheaper to collect taxes, which is a huge cost in many countries.