Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura
I defined how I use the term. In the context of wealth creation there is a clear difference between those who create "real" wealth and those involved in wealth transfer or those who create personal wealth by diminishing the wealth of others.
I am not going any further with your post. Because you made a charge on this point that indicates you have not read what I have written or that you don't take it seriously. I remember specifically trying to get an understanding of the concept before we even went down this road - I don't recall your actual response but I do recall it was some what flip. However, the importance of this question in the context of tax policy and doing what is best for society is paramount. You don't seem to understand that. and i don't know what to say to you.
|
Well either your term doesn't work (i.e. it doesn't make sense) or you're using it wrong.
If I had to define
real wealth, it would be essentially a definition of
economic growth. You know, the collective impact of a bunch of guys with ideas getting some capital and spending it on labour and other things necessary to make a profitable business out of it.
You seem to want to attribute all the credit to the guys with the ideas. I think instead you mean to address the barriers to entry for these guys. Because it's rather clear that real wealth (if I may borrow the term) is created by the application of all these things and nothing less. However, if the guys with the idea can't figure out how to get all the other stuff necessary to create the wealth (or if these things aren't available in the right amount at the right price), then there are problems.
They call that barriers to entry. It's true that rigid regulatory environments can cause such barriers, as can an extreme competitive environment. However, I don't think that is the issue here.
This is a proposed temporary tax on the wealthiest of Germans to help keep the economy out of the lowest of ruts until the recession switches over to a recovery. And then the tax disappears.
That's not a barrier to entry of any significant concern. The actual tax amount would be nominal person to person and would unlikely impede these wealthy folks from wanting to make more money.
I'm assuming you don't mean to suggest that a bit of tax will discourage wealthy people from wanting to become wealthier.
---------- Post added at 01:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Other than the fact that the way I described the concept was in a broader perspective what is the difference between what you present here and what I presented? Either way it illustrates that your post about non-existent "real" wealth is wrong.
|
I'm not saying the wealth doesn't exist. I'm saying your term is incoherent. I'm sure you're talking about actual wealth. I"m just not sure what wealth you're talking about specifically. You make is sound like it comes from the ether, springing out of some guy's head.