Remind me why they deserve $15 an hour...

Actually, he's just questioning the ludicrous notion that level of income has anything to do with whether someone deserves it or not.

And stealing is only stealing if it's done without legal right. Taxation is not stealing.

 

Great. I'm sure you'd feel the same way about the delivery guy's $15 an hour salary.

But thanks for demonstrating the obvious here. If we are going to base income on what is "deserved" you certainly cannot defend $2.5 billion a year income to Walton family heirs.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not a matter of stealing nor your attempt to personalize the argument. It's a matter of whether they "deserve" it.

Genetic lottery -- that's your view on whether someone "deserves" or not?

I've seen that same sentiment by many conservatives here.

 

That is a silly notion. Deserve means to be worthy of punishment or reward. The wealth you accumulate is neither awarded to you for being a good person, nor is someone's failure to accumulate it some kind of punishment.





​

 

So tell us what the Walton heir did to accumulate Sam's fortune they inherited.

Just another spin on conservatives' "Genetic lottery" as to whether someone is deserving or not.

 

So? What's your point?

 

That I agree it's a silly notion. (thought I was pretty clear about that)




​

 

Someone saw the obvious.

 

Do they ship UPS ? That looks good and I won't have to tip the driver.

 

While many Walmart workers are so poorly paid that many rely on tax payer funded food stamps and Medicaid, 6 Walton heirs have a combined wealth of $144 billion dollars, equal to the wealth of the bottom 41.5 percent of Americans combined."

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...-now/just-how-wealthy-wal-mart-walton-family/

I mean, who could possibly have any objection to that except for rank jealousy, right?

 

Better yet. You prove that Sam Walton didn't work his while life FOR the benefit of his kids.

They deserve it, because he desired they inherit the wealth. It was his money, not yours.

 

your link only proves the Waltons can manage their money.... I already knew that.


If a walmart employee wants to stay at the first rung of society, that's not walton's fault...


Walmart employees are paid above min wage.... if they can't manage that money or pop out 5 kids while on that salary.... that's not Walton's fault and the family shouldn't have their money taken from them because Sally the Cashier chose to have 5 kids instead of going to college

 

I didn't say anything about Sam Walton. I asked about his heirs.

Ah. The Genetic Lottery. The conservatives' idea of "deserving" billions. Not the guy hustling to deliver pizza at $15 bucks an hour because he had the gall to forget is (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) pen.

Thanks for straightening us out on conservative views on who "deserves" it. As if we had any doubt to begin with.

 

Well sure, they won the "Genetic Lottery" and deserve every bit of that $144 billoin.

Of course not. If Walmart can take advantage of lousy labor conditions and pay their employees poverty wages so the heirs can build up the $144 billion fortune they so deserve because they won the Genetic Lottery, it's not watlon's fault.

People working full time to care for their families deserve to suffer so the Walton heirs can get more billions they deserve for winning the Genetic Lottery. Got it.

It's always enlightening to see how conservatives think.

 

I agree, it would be nice... but Sam Walton earned that money, and he provided for his family.... just because your father did not do the same.... isn't justification for stealing the Walton Family's money that the Walton family earned.

Money is a tool, and even if it was willed to them, they are still managing that tool.

 

I didn't say anything about stealing anything.

But the heirs didn't earn the $144 billion. They just "deserve" it because they won the "Genetic Lottery", right?

Meanwhile, people working full time to care for their families deserve to suffer so the Walton heirs can get more billions they deserve for winning the Genetic Lottery. Got it.

Anyone can say anything on the internet. Your personal claims are irrelevant.

Well sure, people working full time to care for their families deserve to suffer so the Walton heirs can get more billions they deserve for winning the Genetic Lottery. That's the conservative position your espousing, right?

Tell me how many hours per week the Walton heirs are WORKING. Thanks.

 

Obvious how cons think. They think like the greedy men at the top of this pile. Like Ayn Rand, who saw greed as good.

Thing is, the heirs of Sam's fortune DEPEND upon these low wage workers, and have no problem exploiting other humans for greater profit. Capitalism has that as a principle, as it isn't concerned with providing for the people of a nation, but is only concerned with funneling as much of the income pie upwards into the hands of a few.

Capitalism itself not only creates a few rich, but it also creates the poor. Every capitalistic system will have a good size group of the poor. And many of those will have jobs, but they don't pay enough to live on, because we must have the rich at the top.

We need to see jobs in other ways than low skilled or high skilled. We need to see a job as being necessary for smooth operation of a society. If the job is needed for things to run smoothly, and for goods and services to be there for the people, then the job is essential and should be paid a living wage.

The deck is stacked for the top dogs and isn't concerned with the people below the top dogs. That is its flaw.

 

Its HIS money.

Is he not free to do with it as HE chooses? Including leaving it to his heirs?

You're a thief. Nothing more, nothing less. Now that Sam Walton is dead, and can't defend his desire to leave his wealth derived from his hard work to his kids, you want to sneak in and steel it. Tell them they don't deserve it. You know full well that Sam Walton desired that HIS money be left to them. You just don't care. Most thieves don't care.

 

It's not HIS money. He's dead. It's his heirs' money.

Your utter failure to demonstrate in any way how they "deserve" the scores of billions they got so effectively demonstrates the conservative/1% apologist position.

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about the working guy "deserving" more than minimum wage because he forgot his pen, while the Walton heirs "deserve" their scores of billions because they won the Genetic Lottery.

The 1% get 20+% of the nation's income and have about 40% of the nation's wealth. It has doubled over the past 30 years. The share of the bottom 90% has fallen from 65% to 50%. But it's not enough for the conservatives and 1% apologists. They demand more. They complain about minimum wage workers getting a livable wage to defend more for folks like the Walton heirs because they "deserve" it because they won the Genetic Lottery. They viciously call anyone who objects to this growing wealth inequality names like "thief" and "jealous" because they want more and more.

More is never enough for them.

 

It is his heirs' money because he gave it to them. When you give someone something, it becomes rightly theirs. If you give a waiter a tip, that money is theirs by right. If your grandma gives you a five dollar bill, that money is rightfully yours. Likewise, when Sam Walton chose to give his money to other people in his will, that money became rightfully theirs.

The jealousy that makes a person seek to take that inheritance from the people that was given to them is no different than the childish jealousy that a child on the schoolyard shows when he sees the really nice toy that another kid got for Christmas.

 

The ad hom attacks against anyone who raising an objection to the 1% getting more and more of our nation's income and wealth -- didn't I call it? See post #218.

So in your opinion, what did the heirs do to "deserve" the scores of billions they inherited?

Whether it is deserved is the issue of this thread.

 

Interesting question. What is the value of the love, comfort and joy that a child brings to a parent? What is the value of the companionship a large, happy family brings? What is the value of being cared for by family members who love you?

I think most parents would consider that worth whatever they are able to give. So, that is what these heirs did to deserve what they were given.

 

Seems to me there are three issues here:

1. Employers in areas of business paying low wages and its cheaper to hire people than to use automation and hiring a few skilled workers at higher pay.

2. Workers who are in employment to the above party and not earning enough but if they earned more at some point automation is the better long term option, causing a loss of employment, and these workers don't want to develop more skills (or can't in the case of disabled persons).

3. People entering the workforce at the entry level who also may or may not be in hard to employ groups who won't get jobs if the wages are set to high, you might as well hire someone with experience or who went to a cooking school over someone you need to fully train for example and who might be disabled.

Its a mess to me if you raise wages jobs become likely more skilled thereby demanding more pay but there could be fewer jobs and if you don't more people get jobs but the government needs to support the workers with programs it seems to me hard to hit a middle ground here. And for unskilled young people and the disabled you likely will kill employment outright in many cases.

 

None. The parent is dead.

But I see no reason to think that the Walmart heirs bring more love comfort and joy to their relatives than the pizza delivery guy.

I don't know. Are you saying the pizza delivery guy should be paid based on his companionship a large, happy family?

No doubt. Is this your test for how much someone should get?

 

I wonder how much Steve Jobs' children are worth

http://www.forbes.com/profile/laurene-powell-jobs/

Lauren jobs is worth 15 billion.....

I guess inherited wealth is only bad if the father is a conservative?

 

Fixed for you