Why isn't wealth redistribution practical...?
345966
Move to a Communist country and you'll be all set.  Why should someone who doesn't work get the same benifits of those who work for their money?
925742
Income yes except for those that make poverty wages; wealth no, that would be like taxing someones income twice.
382787
As a woman I was pondering this question myself. This system is not built for us to make it. It's to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer.
319007
A solution... government bite the bullet and pay it back...\n\nPrivatized systems work great for the 15 percent of the population that has the money to do that, but for the majority just barely making it by, they won't be able to save enough to actually retire, ever... \n\nSo, when all these people get retirement age, guess what, they're going to look at their private account, realize isn't not enough to do anything with, especially with inflation, and vote in someone who will take care of them...at a far greater cost to the gov. down the road...\n\nI would be willing to be that about 95 percent of people who push for "private accounts" already own stock... if the government switched over, the huge demand for stocks that would be created would push the stock market sky-high, making all those people very rich... that's really convenient isn't it...
784000
Wow.  What a concept!\n\nWhen their assets are sold, make sure the money goes to people in their district.\n\nAnd it would solve the overcrowding in America in the large cities.
703087
Why not make it $100? \n\nThan making $208,000 a year will be equivalent to making $10,712 a year right now.\n\nOh, but that would mean the price of everything would go, since everyone would be making so much more money.  So, the price of a house that once was $200,000 would than be $5,000,000.  Still out of range for someone making $208,000 a year!\n\nBut other than that, great idea!!!\n\n***********\n\nPeter F, that's a really great idea taxing wealth at 3%.  The government already does too much wealth redistribution, we don't need anymore.\n\nThe answer is simple, the US rewards hard work.  If you want more money either work harder, or get more education.  If you are stuck making only minimum wage for more than a year or two,  then develop some ambition!!
305178
No, your not.  The government is absolutely dreadful at distributing money.  Particularly this administration, which also has yet to figure out that you can't increase spending and decrease income at the same time.  I figure that one out when I was like five.
419783
Your concept is not how economic work. In a very simplified way, you are assuming every potential consumers wants or demands what limited resources cannot supply.\n\nMarkets do not work this way, in practice, and this is the main reason Marxist economic doctrine failed. To each according to his need is a great concept but some people cannot work and represent no productivity and others are extremely productive, far beyond any need they would ever have in a thousand years. With no market to balance outputs you have a system bound for disaster like the former Soviet Union.\n\nA doctor who earns a lot of money and does research that eventually created jobs by way of new technologies and techniques can afford to pay higher taxes as do the people who win new employment because of his research, to help  pay the cost of the care for the individual who is not productive, say because he or she is disabled.\n\nEven in a seriouly distressed situation, like drought or famine, markets can come to the aid of the suffering region because some elements of the market will have surplusses. Also in this day, there are no real famines because transportation can get any amount of food to any point on the globe in little time therefore the real issue is politics and culture not economics.\n\nUntil there are literally too many proplr to fit on the planet, there will be resources to meet the supply and demand marketplace. Maybe not in all commodites but in general.
202564
You have a good point there.  Yes, a flat tax would definitely be the best.  That way more people would be encouraged to start businesses, or expand their existing businesses, thus creating more jobs for everybody.\nThe current tax system is "supposed" to make the income more equal to everybody, when in fact it's the middle class that pays the most taxes - not the welfare people, 'cause they don't earn money, and not the business owners (which would be considered rich), 'cause of the write-offs allowed.  The people in favor of the progressive income tax are shooting themselves in the foot, and don't realize it.
951248
If you can get away with not paying your workers you will be wealthy. It is an investment, albeit an immoral one.
828629
dreaming and planning is good, but thinking about a billion or billions or even borrowing that kind of money is just out of the question.  If you had that much money or could get that much money you wouldn't be asking us how to invest it.  If you had it you would put your portfolio in mixed investments plus have trusts, lend it, put some in real estate, and give it away to the needy for tax purposes.
1049505
Maybe you can do it the old fasioned way:  go door to door, and ask people to give you money.\n\nIf that doesn't work, write letters to rich multi-millionaire Democrats like John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Michael Moore, and Hillary Clinton.  They're always telling us the poor deserve more, well, here's their chance to step up and lead by example.
731135
No such thing as too much money in a free market capitalist system. Hmmm what would you suggest happen? Income redistribution, give some to the poor folks? Nope, they can go to work and make there own!\n\nDonna H down below me, for your information rich Americans are the most benevolent givers of any nation. We give to charities every year more money then the gross national product of most nations on this planet. So don't say they don't give anything back because that my dear.......is a lie!
792314
It is because you spend more than you earn -- the secret to building wealth is to live within your income -- correction, to live within about half your income.  Most people, unfortunately, buy 'wasting' assets, which become worthless.  All of us must buy some of these (food, drink, transportation), but few of us buy 'accreting' assets, those which hold their value or go up in value.  The next time you consider buying a suit, or a shirt, or a CD, or a big mac, ask yourself 'is this better than x shares of a mutual fund, or a deposit to my savings account?'  Up to you.
106437
I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for this to happen.Sure, rich people give to charitible organizations to reduce their tax burden, but the operative words here are "charitible organizations", not individual persons.
391909
The reason for poverty in America is the politics's of greed, or Repuglicans in general. I have mine and I want to make more therefore I do not want to pay taxes and to hell with anybody else. Being poor is no more a choice then homosexuality. It is thrust on 10% of the population by another 10% of the population the very rich. I wonder why of for what reason that a person needs every cent of their billion dollars and there are many billionaires here. There is also a thing with corporate greed. Move the good paying jobs with health benefits overseas to a place where people work for pennies. But do you see the price come down on anything because of it. The answer is a big NO. Socialized medicine is long overdue here it is needed by all, not just an elite few. Every one in the United States should have a birthright to three things food, shelter and health care.
432375
Normally I'd bring in sources, but have decided to merely shoot from the hip on this one. Income inequality is a dicey term. If referring specifically to the idea that some people make millions, and others make so little, then the answer is you cannot necessarily do away with that in a mostly capitalistic society. However, the way to adjust for this problem is through taxes. The rich may not like it, but the amount of money they make every year is more than most of this country will see in their entire lives. Therefore, we must re-instill the wealthy with a sense of patriotism, and institute a truly progressive taxation system. A man making a million dollars a year could easily afford to provide the government with 50-75% of their income in taxes. 90% of the population makes under $100,000 per year, so I believe that the wealthy citizen could manage with $250,000.\nNow, the argument against this is that the rich earned their money, and so they deserve it. However, those people are merely materialistic sheep. They do not understand that money isn't everything, and so they'd rather be measured by what they own and not who they are as people. Consequently, the point is not whether or not they deserve the money, the question pertains to whether or not they are compassionate human beings who understand that we're all on this planet together. If the human race would stop being so selfish, and merely put in some effort to bringing everyone up, the world would be a much better place.\nIn sumation, since the wealthy have a tendancy to be unconcerned with the plight of the poor, it is imperative for the government to provide. And, as stated, the way to provide is to tax. Everyone hates taxes, but without them there would be no government. No government means no laws, and no police or firemen. Therefore, the country would descend into chaos, and we would all lose.