wouldnt it be better cheaper rent/bills ?

[daddymack]

i mean we are demanding jobs for higher pay min wage is going up by that just mean the products are going to increase and the cost of living will rise up, what if we start focusing on lowering down property?
it would be good for
college students making loans or barley hanging
single parents
young adults who living with they parents still
people who work but do not get paid much
have parents struggling a lot less
disable/senior people can make it on they own

it will just make life a better place to live in

 

[johnny196775]

i mean we are demanding jobs for higher pay min wage is going up by that just mean the products are going to increase and the cost of living will rise up, what if we start focusing on lowering down property?
it would be good for
college students making loans or barley hanging
single parents
young adults who living with they parents still
people who work but do not get paid much
have parents struggling a lot less
disable/senior people can make it on they own

it will just make life a better place to live in

You are absolutely correct; what we need is a maximum wage, not a minimum wage. Simple math. We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

 

[sk66rc]

We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

I actually don't agree with it... Of course there will be dishonest people out there... That's regardless of the financial and/or social standing... But for those who make honest living & doing really well... I don't believe there's a good reason why we should take away from honest, hard working people just because they're better off than others... By no means, I'm no millionaire... I do ok... I make contributions financially according to my beliefs... I'd hate to see the day that somebody would come up to me & say, "You owe me everything you have above XXX amount because you don't deserve it..." Who's to decide what I deserve & what I don't? I worked hard for what I have & who are they to decide what I do with what I've gotten/what I worked so hard for? I do agree that I have moral obligation to help those who are in needs... But to say it's a mandatory, I think that's wrong...

 

[9006]

If the price of property was suddenly lowered, millions (billions depending on what the scope is here) would loose money, billions would be wiped from the economy, in turn this would also effect wages and tax percentages; probably for the worst. Not to mention having knock-on effect in other areas such as STOCK and social class. It's certainly something that wouldn't happen quickly.

I do not agree with minimum wage increase, this isn't going to solve anything because some companies cannot afford the increase set by the government, on top of other business bills and tax changes. This, in turn, is why the UK has such a high number of people working in zero hour contracts, the agency boom has increased as minimum wages have also increased. On top of that, there's also increase in modern work slavery and exploitation/increase of foreign workers. The modern day economic system is pretty complicated and it sucks, almost everything effects everything else, it's given in one hand and taken from another; often with another hand taking in between.

 

[Nicolelt]

Meh, actually where I am at, property is really cheap. I am actually an idiot because renting a house is more expensive than buying on here. But I am leaving next summer so that would be a waste to buy a house.

 

[kamya]

Meh, actually where I am at, property is really cheap. I am actually an idiot because renting a house is more expensive than buying on here. But I am leaving next summer so that would be a waste to buy a house.

Same here ><. I'm paying double for rent than what it would cost for me to just buy a house and pay taxes and insurance on it. My only problem is saving up for a down payment.

 

[johnny196775]

We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

I actually don't agree with it... Of course there will be dishonest people out there... That's regardless of the financial and/or social standing... But for those who make honest living & doing really well... I don't believe there's a good reason why we should take away from honest, hard working people just because they're better off than others... By no means, I'm no millionaire... I do ok... I make contributions financially according to my beliefs... I'd hate to see the day that somebody would come up to me & say, "You owe me everything you have above XXX amount because you don't deserve it..." Who's to decide what I deserve & what I don't? I worked hard for what I have & who are they to decide what I do with what I've gotten/what I worked so hard for? I do agree that I have moral obligation to help those who are in needs... But to say it's a mandatory, I think that's wrong...

the rich will keep getting richer and they do not deserve to stockpile billions of dollars while others suffer. I am not saying to take away anything from someone making less than a million dollars. So you are safe. Over a million is greedy and noone needs that. And have a nice day.

 

[Minus]

... We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets.

Do you feel that limiting assets to one million could avoid having a stiffling effect on the growth of small businesses?

 

[daddymack]

If the price of property was suddenly lowered, millions (billions depending on what the scope is here) would loose money, billions would be wiped from the economy, in turn this would also effect wages and tax percentages; probably for the worst. Not to mention having knock-on effect in other areas such as STOCK and social class. It's certainly something that wouldn't happen quickly.

I do not agree with minimum wage increase, this isn't going to solve anything because some companies cannot afford the increase set by the government, on top of other business bills and tax changes. This, in turn, is why the UK has such a high number of people working in zero hour contracts, the agency boom has increased as minimum wages have also increased. On top of that, there's also increase in modern work slavery and exploitation/increase of foreign workers. The modern day economic system is pretty complicated and it sucks, almost everything effects everything else, it's given in one hand and taken from another; often with another hand taking in between.

no one will lose money if the property goes down but the whole point of working is keeping property.....so completely wrong..... even if they lose money it doesn't matter because rent will be low and affordable,
now your second paragraph is correct

 

[sk66rc]

We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

I actually don't agree with it... Of course there will be dishonest people out there... That's regardless of the financial and/or social standing... But for those who make honest living & doing really well... I don't believe there's a good reason why we should take away from honest, hard working people just because they're better off than others... By no means, I'm no millionaire... I do ok... I make contributions financially according to my beliefs... I'd hate to see the day that somebody would come up to me & say, "You owe me everything you have above XXX amount because you don't deserve it..." Who's to decide what I deserve & what I don't? I worked hard for what I have & who are they to decide what I do with what I've gotten/what I worked so hard for? I do agree that I have moral obligation to help those who are in needs... But to say it's a mandatory, I think that's wrong...

the rich will keep getting richer and they do not deserve to stockpile billions of dollars while others suffer. I am not saying to take away anything from someone making less than a million dollars. So you are safe. Over a million is greedy and noone needs that. And have a nice day.

When I read your comment, word "socialism" popped into my head... Though I don't agree with your phrase "they don't deserve stockpile billions...", I do understand where you're coming from... I just think the notion of "them not deserving" is really a fair comment either... Some people work hard & sacrifice a lot in their life to build an empire & they do good things with it like creating jobs & giving away scholarships & other things... How is it that they don't deserve it? I think it's only fair that they do deserve all they have for hard work they put into it & when they become "rich", they have enough moral sensibility to give back to community & more... Who else is more deserving that those who do good with the fruits of their own labor? I know you can always focus on negative people... But I like I mentioned before, you can find negative people like that regardless of their social & financial standing & to take from those who truly derserve it because of those few that does bad sounds a bit off to me... Weather it's millions or hundreds of thousands, sentiments are the same... People having more than what they "need" shouldn't keep it above certain amount, isn't that the point? Yeah, one persone living in 17 bedroom mension with 9 exotic cars is ridiculous... Family of 4 making $750,000 dollars a year, assuming they save enough at the end of each year for long enough to have more than $3 million dollars in their bank account, having 3 cars & 6 bedroom house in a nice neighborhood is hardly a reason to take away their earnings solely on the reasons of them making/having more than a million dollars assets...

Oh, & I also think it promotes laziness... I mean, what's the point of trying harder when you know everything is gonna taken from you when you hit a certain bench-mark? "Yeah, once I hit a million, everything above that is gonna be taken away from me... Why do I wanna make my company/business grow when all I'm doing is breaking my ass for someone to take it & give it away to someone else?"... Or "What's the point of working hard when I know they'll take it from the richs & just hand it to me?" type of attitude will become more common...

 

[daddymack]

We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

I actually don't agree with it... Of course there will be dishonest people out there... That's regardless of the financial and/or social standing... But for those who make honest living & doing really well... I don't believe there's a good reason why we should take away from honest, hard working people just because they're better off than others... By no means, I'm no millionaire... I do ok... I make contributions financially according to my beliefs... I'd hate to see the day that somebody would come up to me & say, "You owe me everything you have above XXX amount because you don't deserve it..." Who's to decide what I deserve & what I don't? I worked hard for what I have & who are they to decide what I do with what I've gotten/what I worked so hard for? I do agree that I have moral obligation to help those who are in needs... But to say it's a mandatory, I think that's wrong...

the rich will keep getting richer and they do not deserve to stockpile billions of dollars while others suffer. I am not saying to take away anything from someone making less than a million dollars. So you are safe. Over a million is greedy and noone needs that. And have a nice day.

When I read your comment, word "socialism" popped into my head... Though I don't agree with your phrase "they don't deserve stockpile billions...", I do understand where you're coming from... I just think the notion of "them not deserving" is really a fair comment either... Some people work hard & sacrifice a lot in their life to build an empire & they do good things with it like creating jobs & giving away scholarships & other things... How is it that they don't deserve it? I think it's only fair that they do deserve all they have for hard work they put into it & when they become "rich", they have enough moral sensibility to give back to community & more... Who else is more deserving that those who do good with the fruits of their own labor? I know you can always focus on negative people... But I like I mentioned before, you can find negative people like that regardless of their social & financial standing & to take from those who truly derserve it because of those few that does bad sounds a bit off to me... Weather it's millions or hundreds of thousands, sentiments are the same... People having more than what they "need" shouldn't keep it above certain amount, isn't that the point? Yeah, one persone living in 17 bedroom mension with 9 exotic cars is ridiculous... Family of 4 making $750,000 dollars a year, assuming they save enough at the end of each year for long enough to have more than $3 million dollars in their bank account, having 3 cars & 6 bedroom house in a nice neighborhood is hardly a reason to take away their earnings solely on the reasons of them making/having more than a million dollars assets...

Oh, & I also think it promotes laziness... I mean, what's the point of trying harder when you know everything is gonna taken from you when you hit a certain bench-mark? "Yeah, once I hit a million, everything above that is gonna be taken away from me... Why do I wanna make my company/business grow when all I'm doing is breaking my ass for someone to take it & give it away to someone else?"... Or "What's the point of working hard when I know they'll take it from the richs & just hand it to me?" type of attitude will become more common...

i agree with you

 

[9006]

no one will lose money if the property goes down but the whole point of working is keeping property.....so completely wrong..... even if they lose money it doesn't matter because rent will be low and affordable,
now your second paragraph is correct

I fail to see how this would result in people not loosing money. It would be a good thing for renters; maybe for buyers, but certainly not for the current owners. Effectively you'd be REDUCING the value of their assets aka loosing money.

 

[daddymack]

no one will lose money if the property goes down but the whole point of working is keeping property.....so completely wrong..... even if they lose money it doesn't matter because rent will be low and affordable,
now your second paragraph is correct

I fail to see how this would result in people not loosing money. It would be a good thing for renters; maybe for buyers, but certainly not for the current owners. Effectively you'd be REDUCING the value of their assets aka loosing money.

like i said, even if the lose money it will benefit them in the long run

 

[johnny196775]

An alternative to fuel is not being looked at? Why? Because a rich person will not invest in something that will lose him money.

 

[daddymack]

An alternative to fuel is not being looked at? Why? Because a rich person will not invest in something that will lose him money.

it will gain him money because he still owns the property, and the property that he currently lives in will be cheaper, and the value of the dollar will increase because the cost of living will be cheaper...............................

 

[sk66rc]

An alternative to fuel is not being looked at? Why? Because a rich person will not invest in something that will lose him money.

Actually, alternative fuel can make rich people more money... More & more private sectors are getting involved in energy field... Here in PA, company called "PECO" has gotten out of "energy GENERATION" business & now concentrating on "DELIVERY" of energy with existing infostructures because enough small "private" companies have been popping up... It's more financially right move for them to make... They own the infostructure so they can charge other companies & it takes the burdens off by reducing their over-head coasts, energy production costs being one of them... Around Lancaster areas, more & more people are going to bio-fuels for their farm equipment... Modified diesel engines for generators & equipment are becoming one of the fastest growing trend right now... It will run off of purified used cooking oils... With areas becoming more commercialized with fast food restaurants, there's almost endless supplies of "cheap fuels"... Building & maintaining solar panels & windmills are becoming one of the largest industries as well... Who owns them? Rich people... It's about control release of the technologies as well... You don't wanna flood the market all at once or it can have negative affects all around, not just rich people... Think of it this way... If government floods $596 trillion dollars into the financial market right now all at once, what do you think will happen to the value of the dollar? What used to cost $5 dollars all of sudden will cost $126 dollars because money loses value... That means it becomes even more horrible for people who are on lower income... They don't have enough to begin with, what they have all of sudden dropped in value by more than 1,000%... At least rich people have enough to ride it out long enough till it evens out... Technology is almost the same... If a technology to make fuels as we know it obsolete gets release tomorrow all at once, then fuel companies will collapse... Then the insurance companies that insured all those oil rigs & office buildings & gas stations will take a huge hit... That means insurance premiums for ordinary people like you and me will go up... Then we'll have to cut down on non essential traveling... If your car is electric car, that means electric usage will go down... That means electric companies will lose money... That means price of the electricity will go up in attempt to make up for the loss... That means farming equipments that runs on electricity gets more expensive to use... That means farmers will produce less... That means price of the produce products, apples & oranges & such, will go up... That means people can't afford it as much... That means they'll have to work more... But the value of the dollar is not the same...

Where does it end?

 

[daddymack]

An alternative to fuel is not being looked at? Why? Because a rich person will not invest in something that will lose him money.

Actually, alternative fuel can make rich people more money... More & more private sectors are getting involved in energy field... Here in PA, company called "PECO" has gotten out of "energy GENERATION" business & now concentrating on "DELIVERY" of energy with existing infostructures because enough small "private" companies have been popping up... It's more financially right move for them to make... They own the infostructure so they can charge other companies & it takes the burdens off by reducing their over-head coasts, energy production costs being one of them... Around Lancaster areas, more & more people are going to bio-fuels for their farm equipment... Modified diesel engines for generators & equipment are becoming one of the fastest growing trend right now... It will run off of purified used cooking oils... With areas becoming more commercialized with fast food restaurants, there's almost endless supplies of "cheap fuels"... Building & maintaining solar panels & windmills are becoming one of the largest industries as well... Who owns them? Rich people... It's about control release of the technologies as well... You don't wanna flood the market all at once or it can have negative affects all around, not just rich people... Think of it this way... If government floods $596 trillion dollars into the financial market right now all at once, what do you think will happen to the value of the dollar? What used to cost $5 dollars all of sudden will cost $126 dollars because money loses value... That means it becomes even more horrible for people who are on lower income... They don't have enough to begin with, what they have all of sudden dropped in value by more than 1,000%... At least rich people have enough to ride it out long enough till it evens out... Technology is almost the same... If a technology to make fuels as we know it obsolete gets release tomorrow all at once, then fuel companies will collapse... Then the insurance companies that insured all those oil rigs & office buildings & gas stations will take a huge hit... That means insurance premiums for ordinary people like you and me will go up... Then we'll have to cut down on non essential traveling... If your car is electric car, that means electric usage will go down... That means electric companies will lose money... That means price of the electricity will go up in attempt to make up for the loss... That means farming equipments that runs on electricity gets more expensive to use... That means farmers will produce less... That means price of the produce products, apples & oranges & such, will go up... That means people can't afford it as much... That means they'll have to work more... But the value of the dollar is not the same...

Where does it end?

wow u wrote a lot lol

 

[blackdot]

I've always said that there needs to be a maximum wage. Just won't work unless it's global. Right now the thieves, I mean the rich, just steal the money. Some are good enough to give money back but it's way less than they continue to bring in.

 

[sk66rc]

wow u wrote a lot lol

Sorry... Had some free time on my hands... Scary part is, that was a short version of my thoughts...

 

[VanillaCreme]

We also need a maximum allowable asset level; no one needs more than a million dollars in assets. Everything else should be taken away and given to the poor. :~D

It's not feasible to limit what people can have. It's not just to claim that no one should be able to have more than a certain amount of assets or money. People have the right to make whatever they want, and if they work hard for it, I don't see why it should be taken away from them simply because there are people who don't have disposable income.