Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

[Greatest I am]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

The hockey stick graph introduced to the climate issue startled enough to start the trend to deal with it.

That shape showed the gross indecency and immorality of our collective focus.

That same immoral shape is what most countries now suffer in their socio-economic demographic pyramids, with a relatively small poor sector when compared to the whole; and especially when compared to the rich.

Statistically and in the long run, the rich have done a good job of improving our collective good.

Going from good to excellent would, cost the rich so little. I have to wonder why their demographers are not recommending that the rich take just a wee bit off the shank of the stick and fix the tip.

It is loose change (a bit of butt tape to our hockey stick), and if the rich will not fix the economy on their own, perhaps we should take their loose change, fix things, --- and raise their grade to excellent.

I understand that there are already several billionaires eager to start such a fund.

Get together, rich benevolent bunch, and set things right.

That will show the world why the rich rule the world.

My rich friends. Boost the trickle down with a one time trickle up and end poverty.

Please hurry, before I must answer yes to my own question.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-am ... ing-fact-2

[Impenitent]

trying to justify theft?

-Imp

[Walker]

Taking from the rich and giving to the poor actually means:
- Taking from the Sheriff of Nottingham, and giving to the poor.
- The Sheriff of Nottingham, is the government.

The government has twisted this old chestnut to mean:
Taking from the wealthy citizens and giving to the government.

Typical government fracturing of The Robin Hood Fairy Tale, at this time in the history of the world.

[commonsense]

Taking from the rich and giving to the poor actually means:
- Taking from the Sheriff of Nottingham, and giving to the poor.
- The Sheriff of Nottingham, is the government.

The government has twisted this old chestnut to mean:
Taking from the wealthy citizens and giving to the government.

The government is supposed to give what it got from the rich to the poorest.

[Skepdick]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

The problem with this sort of question is that you are both rich and poor relative to other members of society.

So how much should we take from you and give to those poorer than you; and how much should we take from those richer than you and give to you?

[commonsense]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

The problem with this sort of question is that you are both rich and poor relative to other members of society.

So how much should we take from you and give to those poorer than you; and how much should we take from those richer than you and give to you?

What would happen if we tithed 10% from the richer and 10% to the poorer?

[Skepdick]

What would happen if we tithed 10% from the richer and 10% to the poorer?

Who are "the richer" and "the poorer"?

[Greatest I am]

trying to justify theft?

-Imp

Taxes are theft to the stupid who use poor language.

Thanks for the mental effort.

[Greatest I am]

Taking from the rich and giving to the poor actually means:
- Taking from the Sheriff of Nottingham, and giving to the poor.
- The Sheriff of Nottingham, is the government.

The government has twisted this old chestnut to mean:
Taking from the wealthy citizens and giving to the government.

Typical government fracturing of The Robin Hood Fairy Tale, at this time in the history of the world.

History instead of an answer to the O.P.

Oh well.

[Greatest I am]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

The problem with this sort of question is that you are both rich and poor relative to other members of society.

So how much should we take from you and give to those poorer than you; and how much should we take from those richer than you and give to you?

How much? IDK.

But when I visualize the amount of those little blocks in my graph that need to move to end poverty, the number is quite few.

Do you see it?

[Skepdick]

How much? IDK.

But when I visualize the amount of those little blocks in my graph that need to move to end poverty, the number is quite few.

Do you see it?

No, I don't see it. What would "ending poverty" amount to in practice?

Irrespective the wealth distribution in society you will always have people on the left-most of your graph. Those people are always "The Poor". By definition.

If 99% of the population in the world has above $10 million and 100% of the population has above $9 million then the 1% of people with $9 million < x < $10 million are "The Poor".

[commonsense]

What would happen if we tithed 10% from the richer and 10% to the poorer?

Who are "the richer" and "the poorer"?

Whoever are both rich and poor relative to other members of society.

[godelian]

Is it time to take from the rich to give to the poor?

No, if you want to force other people, rich or poor, it is not enough to fill out some voting paperwork, because that is just too easy. On the contrary, you must put skin in the game. You must prove that you are willing to risk your life and die for what you believe in.

[Iwannaplato]

A way to reframe the op is to ask: is it time to stop giving money to the rich they haven't earned?

For example, fractional banking BS. Banks can loan money to you. When they've loaned it to you owe them not only that money but also interest. IN addition to that the bank can now loan out that sum they loaned you to someone else. They can do this many times. That means....they create money out of nothing. There are other ways the law, government, society send money to the already wealthy, that ends up being taken from others. To change such practices is not taking from the rich, let alone theft, it is stopping a theft. And what happens when a bank creates money out of nothing. It reduces the value of money. Amongst other things. A plumber's money. A construction worker's pay check. Now worth less.

[Skepdick]

Whoever are both rich and poor relative to other members of society.

So everyone. Except the richest and poorest person.