Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Wealth distribution personally ? Could you please elaborate ? I think he meant '....wealth distribution, personally'. As in,personal opinion. Oh how important the comma is to our communication. :yay:
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Ambani's weath has grown an Incredible 2500 % in the last 8 months ! Woah ! As on Feb 9 , 2007 , he was in 14th position , with a mere $20 billion. He has waltzed everybody on his way to the top. Stunning climb.
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo are you trying to indicate that people like Ambani are responsible for 250 million indians living below the poverty line? Are you a communist?
Gaurav Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 It's not private business ki problem to deal with national social causes. Don't his companies provide thousands of jobs? Why don't you guys donate all your money to poor people instead of being such couch experts? (Gaurav ducks for cover) :hysterical:
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 I think he meant '....wealth distribution, personally'. As in,personal opinion. Oh how important the comma is to our communication. :yay: I had initially thought he meant the distribution of wealth amongst the family members. :D
coffee_rules Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 I had initially thought he meant the distribution of wealth amongst the family members. :D I meant personal involvement in wealth distribution....i.e philanthropy.
fineleg Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Folks, This post is NOT about Ambani or someone specific. As long as wealth is earned via legally right ways, lets not curse the wealthy. Illegal activities, tax scams etc should be punished severely. But if someone makes money via legal means, then it is well earned, and they have the right to keep it, spend it, donate it whatever. You can "prefer" they distribute it, but its totally their choice.
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo are you trying to indicate that people like Ambani are responsible for 250 million indians living below the poverty line? Are you a communist? I am not a communist but neither am I a capitalist. And no, people like Ambani are not responsible for 250 million + indians living in abject poverty. But the SYSTEM is for creating people like Ambani when there are 250 million+ indians living in abject poverty.
fineleg Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo, Pls. read my post #27 above, I dont know why you blame the system (as long as it is legally earned money).
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 As long as wealth is earned via legally right ways, lets not curse the wealthy. I don't think we are cursing the wealthy- we are cursing the system that creates such social fiscal imbalances. And as far as what is and what isnt 'via legally right ways' is concerned, lets just say it is very much a matter of the times and opinion. It aint cut & dried.
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo, Pls. read my post #27 above, I dont know why you blame the system (as long as it is legally earned money). I blame the system because the objective of the system is upliftment of the masses from all walks of life, not throwing up a couple of super-rich in a land of the super-poor. And such a system is fundamentally unsustainable in a free democratic society without resorting to classisms & casteisms.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo, Pls. read my post #27 above, I dont know why you blame the system (as long as it is legally earned money). Legal means ? Who defines what is legal ? We do. If we make it "legal" for uniform wealth distribution , nobody should have a problem i assume.
Lurker Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 And no' date=' people like Ambani are not responsible for 250 million + indians living in abject poverty. [b']But the SYSTEM is for creating people like Ambani when there are 250 million+ indians living in abject poverty. My thoughts are little different to yours Bongo. However I would say you are right about the system. My gripe with system is this. The "Wealth" of people like Ambani is based solely on Stock Market. If he is 63 billion USD worth rest assured he wouldnt even half a billion in his bank account. It is all shares and bonds. And while I am happy to see Share Market getting strong I am also willing to concede that based on my personal experiences Share market economy puts money in hands of few at the cost of others. How many times do we hear how people have been laid off so XYZ could sell the establishemnt and make money? In the end share markets just leave most of us greedy in a way. xxx
Gaurav Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo put down the crack pipe or better still....pass it over :haha:
fineleg Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Legal means ? Who defines what is legal ? We do. If we make it "legal" for uniform wealth distribution , nobody should have a problem i assume. One example: Lets say you are a smart guy who creates or invents a new product or process. You make tons of money via that. That is legal, and the extreme wealth you get is legal. Its yours and you decide what you want to do with it (ofcourse you need to pay taxes). No one can force you to "donate" or "distribute" it.
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 If we make it "legal" for uniform wealth distribution , nobody should have a problem i assume. Cant do that either, for then we descend into the mindless idiocy of communism, where for some weird reason, they expect Mr Brain surgeon to make precisely as much as mr jhaaru-wallah & be all happy. What we can do is dilligently collect taxes from the super-rich & increase taxation on the top 1-5% of Indian society. That way, our country will get massive amounts of revenue and even a higher tax bracket is offest by spiralling foreign investment in local companies, thus resulting in growth of wealth anyways despite a higher tax bracket. The argument against higher tax-brackets are done mostly in the west, where they argue that it'll lead to economic depression/stunt growth and they are right- but they are right in THEIR SCENARIOS- in the western nation's context. Simply because western economies arnt growing much at all ( except for the slow-pace of puttering natural growth due to natural growth of population)- they go into orgasms when their economy grows by 0.5% in a year. As such, in a nation where economic longterm growth is forecasted ( and so far, we are meeting/exceeding the forecasts) to be between 5-12% per annum, there is simply no excuse for not jacking up the tax brackets & efficient tax collection.
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 That is legal, and the extreme wealth you get is legal. Again, not so cut-n-dried. Take for example this- you are a smart guy/girl who invents ground-breaking medicine for AIDS. Now you want royalties for your invention & you are busy dreaming the millions-nay, the billions you will earn. But turns out that 90% of people either cannot afford your life-saving drug or it costs them half their yearly income. So now you end up with super-rich dude who profited essentially from forcing humans to choose between life & death. Still very legal & ethical by your standards ?
Bongosamaj Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Bongo put down the crack pipe or better still....pass it over :haha: Gaurav, i suggest you do not address me in such infantile manner- it contributes NOTHING to the discussion and only shows your petulance.
Ram Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 One example: Lets say you are a smart guy who creates or invents a new product or process. You make tons of money via that. That is legal, and the extreme wealth you get is legal. Its yours and you decide what you want to do with it (ofcourse you need to pay taxes). No one can force you to "donate" or "distribute" it. Why not ? We do many things for public convenience. We cant just do whatever we want, there is something called public good. Its like saying " I will play music in my house as loudly as i want" . That doesnt work that way because public good is affected. Wealth distribution is something that helps public good. We must be objective enough to not just look at the system and say, " Well, everything is done by the book" . The main issue , the system IS the problem. How can we accept something based on something whose foundations itself is shaky ?
Lurker Posted October 29, 2007 Posted October 29, 2007 Cant do that either, for then we descend into the mindless idiocy of communism, where for some weird reason, they expect Mr Brain surgeon to make precisely as much as mr jhaaru-wallah & be all happy. What we can do is dilligently collect taxes from the super-rich & increase taxation on the top 1-5% of Indian society. That way, our country will get massive amounts of revenue and even a higher tax bracket is offest by spiralling foreign investment in local companies, thus resulting in growth of wealth anyways despite a higher tax bracket. The argument against higher tax-brackets are done mostly in the west, where they argue that it'll lead to economic depression/stunt growth and they are right- but they are right in THEIR SCENARIOS- in the western nation's context. Simply because western economies arnt growing much at all ( except for the slow-pace of puttering natural growth due to natural growth of population)- they go into orgasms when their economy grows by 0.5% in a year. As such, in a nation where economic longterm growth is forecasted ( and so far, we are meeting/exceeding the forecasts) to be between 5-12% per annum, there is simply no excuse for not jacking up the tax brackets & efficient tax collection. Aint gonna happen. I am completely against this extra taxation on rich. For the simple reason that the taxes that would be paid would go into the pockets of corrupt politician. What we need is a more clean political system first before we implement these draconian tax laws. I am pretty sure an average Indian wont mind paying extra if he knows the money shall go in the right hands.
Recommended Posts