Hard work = $250,000 ?
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 10-24-2008 - 9:07am |
I’ve read repeatedly that the $250,000 is hard earned money that the government has no right to tax. Personally, I don’t believe that hard work consistently results in high salaries and I’m not convinced that people who make more money work harder or deserve more than most people. Most people, I believe, do work hard and most people are rewarded with 25,000 – 45,000 salary. Not all some hard workers make more and some make less. What do you think? Is the Just World view valid?
http://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/beliefs7csend.pdf
most people have a strong need to believe that they live in a world that is just, in the sense that people generally get what they deserve, and deserve what they get. When confronted with data that contradicts this view they try hard to ignore, reinterpret, distort, or forget it —for instance by finding imaginary merits to the recipients of fortuitous rewards, or assigning blame to innocent victims.
Because of their imperfect willpower, individuals constantly strive to motivate themselves (or their children) towards effort, educational investment, perseverance in the face of adversity, and away from the slippery slope of idleness, welfare dependency, crime, drugs, etc. This is another recurrent finding from the sociological evidence. In such circumstances, maintaining somewhat rosy beliefs about the fact that everyone will ultimately get their “just deserts” can be very valuable. Furthermore, if enough individuals end up with the view that economic success is highly dependent on effort, they will ultimately represent a pivotal voting block, and set a low tax rate. Conversely, when individuals anticipate that society will carry out little redistribution, the costs of a deficient motivation to effort or savings are much higher than with high taxes and
a generous safety net. Each individual thus has greater incentives to maintain his belief that effort ultimately pays, and consequently more voters end up with such a world view.
For instance, data from the World Values Survey shows that only 29% of Americans believe that the poor are trapped in poverty, and only 30% that luck, rather than effort or education, determines income. The figures for Europeans are nearly double: 60% and 54% respectively. Similarly, Americans are more than twice as likely as Europeans to think that the poor are lazy (60% versus 26%).
Indeed, 59% of Americans agree or strongly agree that “in the long run, hard work usually brings a better life”; this view commands much less support in Europe, ranging from 34% in Sweden to 43% in Germany.
Is the “American dream,” according to our theory, just a self-sustaining collective illusion?


Pages
>>>I don't care where you live, taking home over $13,000/per month can get you a pretty nice living.
And I was referring to a mortgage payment.
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
>>some people can't figure that out...
if i live in the middle of nowhere, and cost of living is low, it would be easy for me to think...damn...$250K is a lot of money....those people are rich!
but if i live in a bustling metropolis where cost of living is high....it is more likely that $250k wouldn't go as far, and someone of that income would still need to be wise with expendatures to make ends meet. <<
Or perhaps you are not listening to what other people are saying. Because I for one am well aware of the differences in location and I still contend that in the upper end of the salary range housing costs have no relevance.
>>Because you believe it doesn't give you (through the government) the "right" to take money from others to pay for someone's med school. <<
I agree that the "government" has no "right" to take from others, but just as I support government involvement in medical licensing, I support government involvement in eduction.
"I had to laugh at your comment about coming up with orders for nurses to carry out.
"No offense to doctors, but becoming a doctor is NOT a good way to make a lot of money. A hospital administrator - yeah, maybe."
this is so very true.
Instead they would jeopardize economic growth (i.e, JOBS) so they don't have any responsibility to contribute. I'd say it's not he wealthier who are being selfish. Remember they are after all paying the highest share of their income and almost the entire federal tax burden.
The question should be why isn't he raising taxes on everyone if they're so badly needed? The answer is easy. He wanted to get elected--and it worked. But yet the "wealthy" are selfish? Please."
"Many years ago, I worked in banks and it was 28% of gross that was the amount that was
Pages