# Who are the “greedy” ones?



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Interesting post from Robert kiyosaki. Now, I’m not a big fan of his, but it’s an interesting perspective...



> It’s the poor who are greedy, NOT the rich.
> 
> What?!?
> 
> ...


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

Just a Guy said:


> Interesting post from Robert kiyosaki. Now, I’m not a big fan of his, but it’s an interesting perspective...


we are surely entering a period of backlash against wealthy people, we will see how far it goes

i certainly do not think that the poor are greedy but i do think they are misplaced in their blame of the wealthy

never mind bill gates philanthropy (which is world leading and significant) his product (microsoft) has created incalculable wealth for the world that spans a range from the poorest who say, work in maintenance of facilities, to the richest who create unique products and reap the rewards

every single communist country in history has been a failure in comparison to free market nations but the "blame the wealthy" mantra is gaining adherence

seth klarman has sounded a warning on the "global division and debt", i think he is on to something, time to batten down the hatches kids

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/business/dealbook/world-economic-forum-klarman.html


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Greed has nothing to do with rich or poor. Greed is defined as an intense and selfish desire by someone for something. There are plenty of greedy people using whatever criteria you wish to use to define different groups. The text you quote is just simplistic nonsense that tries to suggest that greed only applies to money. ie. rich vs. poor. I doubt very much there is a person alive who does not have some greed in them in some way. Greed is the most consistent motivator that exists in humans and without it, we'd still be in the Stone Age. 

Greed is not anywhere near as simplistic as some want to suggest it is and if you are going to try and talk about it, you need to dig much deeper into what it really is and what it really does. Here is a place to start: https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/hide-and-seek/201410/is-greed-good


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Umm, “greed is defined as an intense and selfish desire by someone for something” have you not read postings on this site that say “tax the rich, give me UBI”?

Seems to fit the definition. Out of the rich people I know, most are quite generous. I don’t know many who are obsessed with making more money (they may continue to make a lot of money, but that’s because it’s what they do). However I do see a lot of people who seem to think that they have a right to the money made by others despite not actually doing anything for it. 

Personally I do a lot of volunteer work with the poor, but the poor I work with rarely volunteer for anything. Many do, however, feel quite entitled to all the social programs they take advantage of and even seem to feel like they aren’t enough, they “deserve” more. 

When I was dead broke and injured, I looked for ways to change my situation, not take advantage of others.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

In 2017, Mr. Klarman returned some of his fund to his investors, saying he didn’t see enough good investment opportunities.

Oops!


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Logically, wouldn't the people who have "more" be greedier, on average, than those who have less? They must have had a motivation to acquire "more". Notice I said "on average". Not all rich people are motivated by greed, of course.

The rich can afford to be more generous, simply because they have more to give. Bill Gates could give away 99% of his wealth with no material impact on his lifestyle.

Poor people might just appear to be more greedy on the surface simply because they're struggling to meet their needs. People need to take care of their own needs before they can help others meet their needs.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

the social capital benchmark survey is a very large and well conducted survey that studied civic engagement and it found thusly:



> The Poor: Perhaps they don’t pay much in taxes, but the poor do contribute a healthy amount to charity. The 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey shows that households *with incomes below $20,000 gave 4.6% to charity, higher than any other income group*. Households earning between $50,000 and $100,000 donated 2.5 percent or less. Only above income levels of $100,000 does the percentage rise again.


https://www.financialsamurai.com/the-average-percent-of-income-donated-to-charity/

it tends to be the people in the middle who look greedy but i think that just means that they are feeling squeezed and don't have a lot left over to give


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

What is stopping the “poor” from becoming “rich”. I started when I couldn’t work and was living off credit cards, I was in a huge debt with no social services to help me out of my situation. 

Today I continue to acquire houses, run companies and buy stocks because I enjoy it, not because I want more. I like finding the places I do, I like negotiating, I like providing housing at a reasonable price to people. I even offer to help other people to do it themselves. The fact that I benefit from what I do has nothing to do with greed and more to the fact that I’m actually doing something that happens to make money. Making money seems to be a learned skill which I happen to be good at. If you don’t want to learn it, you probably won’t be good at it.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Greed is a intrinsic human emotion. Some have a little more of it then others but we all have it. Waiting for an item you want to buy to come on sale is the result of greed. It is not necessarily bad, it is what it is.

Capitalism, by its very nature will always have one group more wealthy then the other. It would not work otherwise. The wealthy group will be significantly smaller and significantly wealthier, if capitalism is working properly. The wealthier the rich get the more better off the poor will be. That being said, there needs to be regulations. Labour laws, minimum wages, national holidays etc., that you cannot leave to individuals to sort out because as I said, we are all greedy to some degree and even if we don't take it to the extremes, it will bias our decisions...and the people with the money tend to get to make more of the decisions.

The thing people miss when they talk about the rich, is how many of the poor they employ. Most rich people have provided magnitudes more money to others via employment then they ever have with philanthropy. The best thing a rich person can do is horde their money in some nice active investments that can grow and grow, making them richer and richer, employing more and more and more. 

Unfortuneately, I have noticed that people would prefer to be worse off but have everyone in the same boat, then to be better off but not as well off as others. It is quite bizarre but that appears to be the way people prefer it.


----------



## STech (Jun 7, 2016)

A number of people I work with, and some acquaintances, are very quick to say "wow that must be nice to own, or must be nice to have the luxury of X, or not worry about credit card bills", etc. Then you ask them the last time they worked months of 15 hour days, or the last investment book they read, and they're always either silent, or call me a workaholic. So really what they say or think, doesn't register with me anymore, but it used to. 

There was a period of time where I felt somewhat guilty for what I had, and definitely felt bad about "not struggling". But as I got older and realized the complainers were all the same type. Pretty much all of them were born into middle class families, who were stable and never had any adversities in life. None of them were mentally or physically disabled, and quite a few of them were physically very attractive. On the other hand, I was the one who came from a refugee family that fled a war torn country. We started fresh in this amazing country, we worked damn hard and studied long. We lived on rice and tuna forever, and never had anything half nice to wear. A picnic in the park once a month was our form of vacation.

As time went on, our careers got established and net worth grew, we slowly started buying a bit nicer stuff, and finally started taking vacations, and cut back on work slightly. The work ethic is still there, and neither me or any of my siblings have ever bought a brand new vehicle. Yet combined we own multiple properties, 2 businesses, and employee a few people. We all wish we had more time to volunteer, but we do give to our charities of choice.

So like I said, I don't concern myself any longer with what people say and think about this topic. Canada is an amazing, generous, and extremely fair country. It's the best country in the world, bar none. You want something, go and get it. You'll get much further ahead running with your legs, than standing still with your hand out.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Just a Guy said:


> Making money seems to be a learned skill which I happen to be good at. If you don’t want to learn it, you probably won’t be good at it.


Some of it can be learned, but there's also ability or talent, which is innate. You seem to have found the perfect niche for your own personal skills/talents.

Could all poor people become rich? I don't think so. Even if they could all become rich individually, they could not all as a group become rich. Like OptsyEagle said, capitalism necessitates that the "rich" group is much smaller than the "poor" group.

As for whether the poor are better off when the rich become richer -- I think that is probably true up to a certain level. I'm not sure what that level is, though.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

nathan79 said:


> As for whether the poor are better off when the rich become richer -- I think that is probably true up to a certain level. I'm not sure what that level is, though.


That is for the people that make the regulations to figure out. It definitely cannot be the rich people deciding it, but it is usually warped towards the poor and that is almost as big of problem.

Anyway, the best example I know, to illustrate my point, is to google "billionaires by country". When you look at the countries with the most and the least billionaires, ask yourself. If you were going to be poor, which country do you think you would be better off in? It will be a choice between the United States of America and maybe Ethiopia. Now all you have to do is google "poor people in Ethiopia" and ask yourself if you have ever, in your life, seen poverty in Canada, that is even remotely similar to the pictures you will see.

We don't have poor people in Canada. We have people who are less well off then others. Free healthcare alone, will put you miles ahead of Ethiopia.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Nathan, nothing I do requires more than a basic education. Can you read, can you do basic math, etc. I don’t have some secret skills, I just took the time to do something. How many times have I posted about a property I found only to have people say “that’s not possible”. This on an investment forum. If people here don’t believe it’s possible, how many of the “poor” will?

I’ve outlined my system many times, I’ve even posted listing in the past, yet still people think I’m lying...you can’t teach some people because they don’t want to learn. If people on this board won’t do what I do because they don’t want to, the poor are probably less likely by several orders of magnitude...but that still doesn’t mean they couldn’t do it. 

Many of the poor I deal with remain poor for two reasons...

First, they have no idea how to handle money, and giving them more doesn’t help. It’s like handing a child a chainsaw and telling them to got to it. They don’t know what they are doing and wind up in more trouble than when they started. It’s a hard problem to fix because most people don’t have much more knowledge than they do. Their social workers are living paycheque to paycheque, so are their teachers, their relatives are usually in the same state and they have no idea how to change their situation.

The other reason they remain poor is they don’t want to change. Change takes effort, sacrifice and usually pain. People tend to avoid that. It’s better to stay in their comfort zone than to venture out into the unknown. 

Funny thing is, those two reasons also apply to many middle class as well.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

STech said:


> . You'll get much further ahead running with your legs, than standing still with your hand out.


I like this.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

John D Rockefeller liked to show people some of the letters he got, when they accused him of being greedy. Dozens of them every day from complete strangers begging for money or demanding money, or asking for his backing in some business venture. None of them offering anything in return, or a share of the business profits.

Show them the many philanthropic, educational and religious organizations he contributed to.

Then he would ask, now who is greedy?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> John D Rockefeller liked to show people some of the letters he got, when they accused him of being greedy. Dozens of them every day from complete strangers begging for money or demanding money, or asking for his backing in some business venture. None of them offering anything in return, or a share of the business profits.
> 
> Show them the many philanthropic, educational and religious organizations he contributed to.
> 
> Then he would ask, now who is greedy?


Pretty easy to give money away when you have more then you need. A nice gesture but when he gives so much away that he is forced to live in a small 5000 square foot house with only 4 bathrooms and 1 servant and I might start to have some admiration for the deed.

Anyway, as I said before. Better they keep it and invest it. They have proven they know how to grow it and create jobs and prosperity for many, a lot better then the poor who would receive it from philanthropy. Create jobs, grow GDP, pay an obscene amount in income taxes and use that for the poor. Much better system then just giving a man a fish.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

Pretty anecdotal but the poor people I know (and there are several in my extended family) have extremely unrealistic expectations of how happy money will make them or how it will solve their problems. This point of view seems to stimulate such things as buying lottery tickets, gambling, spending money to make appearances or spending just to get a short term high. Most people whom I have encountered who are well off don't have any allusions that money is anywhere close to being the most important thing in life. 

I found a silly question on Facebook telling. It went something like this: You had 2 choices: 
1) You could be 10 years older and have 10 million dollars 
2) You could be 20 again with no money but retain all the knowledge you have now. 

It is amazing how many people chose #1 and some of the people who chose it were the poor relatives I spoke of. To me, there's no amount of money that is worth 10 years of my life.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> Pretty easy to give money away when you have more then you need. A nice gesture but when he gives so much away that he is forced to live in a small 5000 square foot house with only 4 bathrooms and 1 servant and I might start to have some admiration for the deed.
> 
> Anyway, as I said before. Better they keep it and invest it. They have proven they know how to grow it and create jobs and prosperity for many, a lot better then the poor who would receive it from philanthropy. Create jobs, grow GDP, pay an obscene amount in income taxes and use that for the poor. Much better system then just giving a man a fish.


Rockefeller contributed generously to religious and charitable works even when he was a young man working as a clerk in a wholesale grocery house. He also taught Sunday school and was known as 'the Deacon' to the other clerks. He was a member of the same congregation all his life.

I believe this was a big part of his success. The oil business was known as a wild and woolly affair when he got involved in it, with many fly by night companies, slick characters, and boom and bust cycles. He was one of the few who was in the business for the long term and was known to be honest and reliable. One commentator pointed out that if a man is prone to be unfair or greedy his employees will feel it first, but Standard Oil never had any strikes or labor troubles which speaks well for Rockefeller's management.

He gradually withdrew from business in his fifties and devoted the rest of his life to philanthropic work, founding the University of Chicago among other things, and supporting it out of his own pocket for many years.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Not saying anyone is a bad person and compared to not giving anything, giving something is always a better gesture.

I just have a hard time falling down and bowing to two types of charitable givers:

1) When someone has more then 2 times the money they will ever need in their lifetime and they give away less then 10% of their net worth (the majority of rich philanthropers) 

2) People who give money away in their wills.

If you think about the last. What they are saying is that all they really care about is themselves. They obviously have no problem watching the strife and issues the charity has to deal with while they are alive. It hardly bothers them at all, but when they are absolutely sure they have no more need for their money (when dead) they are willing to do something about it. For that non-costly gesture they probably expect a monument or building wing named in their honor.

Again, better then doing nothing, but not by much, if you ask me. I don't think Mother Theresa needs to worry about competition here.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Giving isn’t always about money. In fact I’ve got issues giving money to various charities because of the way they manage it. However, one can also give time, something everyone has. 

I donated my time to many charities all my life, starting back in high school. I volunteered for many activities, even when unemployed. Everntually it grew to where I was a board member (invaluable experience it turned out for my later investments, though I didn’t know it at the time) which even sent me for training (a win-win benefit). I remember also improving sales skills and other benefits. 

My kids, all basically unemployed, have also done volunteer work almost all their lives. Funny thing is, I didn’t even really realize it until I started writing this. It’s just part of normal life for us. There’s nothing formal about this, we don’t dedicate a certain number of hours, or even a specific charity, we just do it when we want, or when we see a need.

I remember once, when I was helping build the local community league’s new playground, one of the volunteers asking why I was there since I didn’t have kids...I said because someday I may, and I enjoyed playgrounds all my life.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Just a Guy said:


> Nathan, nothing I do requires more than a basic education. Can you read, can you do basic math, etc. I don’t have some secret skills, I just took the time to do something. How many times have I posted about a property I found only to have people say “that’s not possible”. This on an investment forum. If people here don’t believe it’s possible, how many of the “poor” will?
> 
> I’ve outlined my system many times, I’ve even posted listing in the past, yet still people think I’m lying...you can’t teach some people because they don’t want to learn. If people on this board won’t do what I do because they don’t want to, the poor are probably less likely by several orders of magnitude...but that still doesn’t mean they couldn’t do it.
> 
> ...


I think you and Nathan need to agree to agree. 

Nathan has a valid point in that everything needs some degree of 'ability, talent, innate qualities'. After all, just wanting to play for the Blue Jays doesn't mean everyone who wants to is going to be able to do so. You are also right in saying, 'change takes effort, sacrifice, pain'. You are in fact agreeing with Nathan, in that it takes something beyond simple desire to have/do something.

Having retired in my early 40s, I have had a lot of people over the years ask me how I managed to do that. My answer is that it is SIMPLE, just spend less than you earn and invest the difference wisely. That is all that it takes. One simple sentence covers it all.

But it is not EASY. Simple and easy are two entirely different things. You are focusing on the 'it's simple' Just A Guy, while Nathan is focusing on the 'not easy' side. Both are right. Change is not something people find it easy to do and it is not necessarily because they 'don't want to change' as you are suggesting, it is because it take a lot of 'effort, sacrifice and pain etc. as you realize.

I used to facilitate seminars on change and at the end of the seminars I would ask people to do a small exercise. Here it is. Using your non-dominant hand, write your signature on a piece of paper as many times as you can in 15 seconds. Simple. Most got 2-4 signatures done and most were totally illegible. No surprise there obviously. But then I would ask them a question. Supposing you lost the use of your dominant hand for some reason? What do you think it would take for you to learn to write well with your other hand? The answer of course is time, practice, persistence, etc. The exact same things it takes to change anything.

Some changes are only likely to happen when they are forced. You yourself Just A Guy speak of having been in a way forced to change and re-invent yourself, by circumstances. Lose your dominant hand in an accident and no doubt you will learn to write with your other hand. Some changes area easy, some require a much stronger motivation to make them happen and if a given individual does not have that strong a motivation, simply 'wishing' for something will not make it happen. 

Nor will telling them 'If I can do it, you can do it'. I retired very early, most people can't do that no matter how much they wish they could. I always remember being in the office one day and frustrated by Engineering Department telling me 'no we can't do that'. So frustrated that I said out loud (very), 'I'm going to put a poster up on the wall right there, that says, 'Think Small And Conform.' I did not accept that answer from the Engineering department whose experts were telling me, a simple salesperson, it can't be done. I went home and figured out how to do it and provided the answer to my customer. I had to teach myself about something that most would consider totally outside of their job description, wheelhouse, whatever you want to call it. I had to out-engineer the Engineers. But I was determined to get that order no matter what it took to do so. That's how I retired so early, if you put a wall in my way, I will drive a tank through it. But I also know it is foolish to try to tell others, 'all you have to do is learn how to drive a tank.'


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

It proyjas to do with the attitude in my house. “I can’t” isn’t allowed. THere is always a solution, it may not be obvious, it may be unconventional, but we aren’t allowed to get stopped by “problems”. 

To me, investing isn’t hard. I developed simple systems and, like most simple things, it tends to work. I never took special courses, I didn’t study under an investment guru, I didn’t even have access to something like this forum. To me, the “hard” part is getting started for 99.9999% of people. They either suffer from fear or analysis paralysis. 

As for working with my non-dominant hand, I happen to be ambidextrous. As for driving a tank, I’d be up for it if you got me access. I’ve driven most types of vehicles at one time or another.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I think its better for the filthy rich to do stuff like build mansions, commission super yachts, buy/crash Lamborgini's etc rather than just give the dough away. Better to create some employment & tax money.

Its better to give a bum a job (I have many times although long term rarely worked out) than hand him $20 for a fix.


----------



## *PetePerfectMan* (Jan 24, 2019)

Just a Guy said:


> Interesting post from Robert kiyosaki. Now, I’m not a big fan of his, but it’s an interesting perspective...


Greed is an inordinate or insatiable longing for material gain, be it food, money, status, or power. In this article, it's pertaining to money. Greed came from a different form of things that surrounds us. It is not between poor or rich, it's on how people react and be uncontented of the things they have.


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

Its an obvious over generaliztion to say the poor are greedy. Every economic class has some greedy people. Greed is a pathological love of something, usually money. 
I've known poor people who are quite happy due to the fact that they value culture and the arts more highly than a job that is meaningless to them. They have no interest in devoting their lives to the rat race. they are poor by choice and their artistic endeavors give them meaning. 
Other poor people I know think that the poor are morally superior to the rich. They are poor on purpose in order to maintain their supposed moral superiority. This is the granola bar and anarchist crowds, chronically anti-establishment folks who apparently evolved out the the hippies. 
Then there are the poor that JAG always complains about. Such poor are broken souls, and all the kings men can't put them back together again. 
There are poor who want to be rich, who seem to always fail. The defining charactoristic of these folks seem to be immediate gratification. They can't wait. They can't play the long game in which the tortise usually wins. 

Of the rich, the greedy are psychopaths, like Tony Soprano, and Bernie Madoff. Other greedy rich, are more difficult to identify, and their methods are more legal, but they over promise, and under deliver, and over charge.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ From the article in post #1:



> In my experience, a lot of poor people are more “greedy” than rich people.


 ... so the article sums it up that both the poor and the rich are just as greedy? So what's new and what is the author's point, other than a rant?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Maybe it’s to try and wake up some of the “poor” who are always holding out their hands and yelling tax the rich that they are acting the same as the people they hate?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ From the article in post #1:
> 
> ... so the article sums it up that both the poor and the rich are just as greedy? So what's new and what is the author's point, other than a rant?


Who was saying that "Greed" is a human emotion that all people have. Oh yeah, it was me. 

Like all emotions, some have better control over it then others but we all have it. I think my example was that waiting to buy something on sale comes from your emotion of greed. Bending over to pick up a $20 bill you found on the ground, comes from the emotion of greed. I could go on. 

I mentioned in a thread on wills today, that in 2nd marriages, even though both parties agree that all their money will be divided equally between both spouses children, upon the death of the 2nd spouse, it rarely happens that way if the 2nd spouse lives around 10 years or more longer then the 1st. This is not because the surviving spouse forgot their agreement or because the surviving spouse is a lier or unethical. It is because of the bias that makes up all their future decisions. A lot of that bias comes from the emotion of greed, that they may not have known they were susceptible to. It also comes from their never ending concern for their own children and the bias that goes with that emotion as well, when they make future decisions. A new love in their life doesn't help either but that is not necessary for the derailment of their estate plans.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The author in the OP went bankrupt in November 2018. His next book should be entitled Rich Dad, Poor Dad, Bankrupt Dad.

A report into the Forbes 400 list of wealthiest people revealed 50% of them inherited their money. 

Of the remaining 50% who earned their riches, most were from middle to upper middle class families who could provide some financial support.

There are very few wealthy people who have managed to lift themselves out of poverty.

Some of the super rich who earned their fortunes, said they had the benefit of 3 things that were key to their success.

Hard work, opportunity and good luck. Without the combination of all 3 factors they would not have been successful.

Poor people may have a good work ethic, and they may have some good luck, but they lack the opportunity.

A research paper by Harvard University concluded that "opportunity" is the most influential factor in success.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

How many look for their “opportunities”? How many would recognize their “opportunities”? How many are willing to take the risk of their opportunities?

I think those questions are more prevalent than complaining that they don’t have “opportunities”.

I’ve literally taken a person right through my process of finding a property, right up to the offer being written and a tenant lined up and they still couldn’t go through with it. 

The world is also made up of more than 400 people (most of them Americans btw, you seem to forget you live in canada and the wealthy are quite different).

P.S. if anyone bothers to fact check, it wasn’t kiyosaki who went bankrupt, it was one (not all) of his companies. Then again, it’s easier to make things up to support ones beliefs.


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

When I read about kiyosaki, I'm inclined to think he is one of the greedy ones. Reportedly, CBC marketplace heard him acknowledge some problems with bullying in seminars, but he blamed it on the licensee.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/rich-dad-seminars-deceptive-marketplace-1.877709

to me greed implies more than just enjoying material things. There is nothing wrong with being materially well off. Greed is wanting it so bad that one engages in shady methods to achieve it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

From research it looks like Kiyosaki has been bankrupt at least 3 times.

He is the quintessential flim flam man, peddling expertise in a a subject of which he knows nothing.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

If the wealthy weren't greedy, they wouldn't be spending fortunes to lobby governments for favorable legislation and tax cuts. 

The wealthy never seem to have enough. They always want more. To them it is a game and a play on their vanity.

Donald Trump used to call the Forbes magazine trying to convince them to rank him higher and with more money than he has.

For billionaires, more money isn't as much about the money as it is about bragging rights.

For most other people money is about day to day survival.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

You obviously don’t understand how the tax system works. When you get a tax break, you don’t get to keep the money, you’ve put it into the economy. For example, I can pay taxes, or pay my accountant (his fee is a tax deduction). You probably do your own taxes to “save money”. I created employment, you didn’t. I don’t get to keep the money I write off, and I don’t get to write off the entire accounting fee. 

The government gives people and companies tax breaks so that they put money back into the economy, unlike the person who does their own taxes. Now you add in all the people the rich employ, the equivalent they buy and add on the taxes they pay and compare it to what you paid and you’ll see they aren’t exactly evading a contribution to society. 

As for Kiyosaki, again you confuse his various businesses (which all employed people) with his personal finances. Many businesses declare bankruptcy for a wide variety of reasons. 2 out of three businesses fail in the first 3 years. Greed has nothing to do with reality. 

Even still, what does declaring bankruptcy have to do with his statement? Since people like sags have never run a business, does that suddenly make them more intelligent, more altruistic, more generous?

Personally, I find kiyosaki to be a cheerleader who says next to nothing when it comes to making money, but not everything he said was stupid. I like his definition of assets and liabilities for example. I certainly wouldn’t attend any of his seminars though.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

When people say that the poor are greedy. I personally believe they are mistaking envy for greed. When the poor want the rich to pay more tax, I think that is about 10% greed and 90% envy. 

As I have said many times. We have almost no poor in our country at all. All we really have are groups of people that are less well off then others. I mean just having clean water come out of your tap puts you ahead of about 500 million people in this world. We have food banks, soup kitchens, snow suit giveaways, free healthcare, GIS/OAS, low income housing, student loans/grants, subsidized drugs for seniors, seniors discounts, free nursing home care, and a charity for just about any annoyance a person can find. I mean we have toy drives for kids that don't get toys at Christmas. Sure, not everyone is eligible for everything, but if you really need it, it is there. I repeat, we do not have poor people in Canada, only groups of people less well off then others. So any complaints about this, really comes from envy not greed.

This is also illustrated by what I have seen in that it appears to me, that the average person would be happier to be less well off financially as long as no one else is better off. They seem to want to reject anything that might provide improvement to themselves, if someone else gets more improvement then them.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> You obviously don’t understand how the tax system works. When you get a tax break, you don’t get to keep the money, you’ve put it into the economy. For example, I can pay taxes, or pay my accountant (his fee is a tax deduction). You probably do your own taxes to “save money”. I created employment, you didn’t. I don’t get to keep the money I write off, and I don’t get to write off the entire accounting fee ...


Interesting ... typical accounting fees like bookkeeping, audits and preparation of financial statements seem to be good for 100% write off. Advice or preparation of income tax and benefit return and any related information returns need to be tied to the business/rental but once the need is confirmed, there does not seem to be any reductions.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-ag...rentals/rental-expenses-you-deduct.html#Legal

Unless maybe your accounting fee total is a mix of the business related ones and some personal ones that have nothing to do with the business?


Cheers


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

The author is right. The ' rich' usually meaning the hardest working and most productive in society already pay a disproportionate amt of tax too. The top 10% pay 55% of all tax yet only get 35% of all income. The bottom 50% pay little or no tax and earn ~ 33% of all income. Left wingers and their politicians think taxing the most productive should have no limits until they get a free ride for everything.

For most there is equal opportunity too. Anyone w hard work can get into university and get a student loan. The most needy can get grants so education is free. So they have at least as much opportunity as anyone else, excluding the maybe top 1% who go to work in their family businesses.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Eclectic, you’re probably right. My point was more not all tax deductions are at 100% (say a computer purchase), so people pay for the item and still pay taxes on top of that. I’m not an accountant, so I don’t know all the rules, that’s why I hire the accountant...plus he’s a tax write off and I’m providing employment. Unlike those do it yourself people who are trying to unemploy people. P-)


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> When people say that the poor are greedy. I personally believe they are mistaking envy for greed. When the poor want the rich to pay more tax, I think that is about 10% greed and 90% envy.


 ... or equally applicable to the "rich" such as "kiyosaki" claiming the poor is greedier because him, the "rich guy" has to pay more taxes to support them. Barring this view, then he's no more than a bragger with a poor-me-rich mentality that is not even comparable to the real rich (ultra).



> As I have said many times. ... So any complaints about this, really comes from envy not greed.





> This is also illustrated by what I have seen in that it appears to me, that the average person would be happier to be less well off financially as long as no one else is better off. They seem to want to reject anything that might provide improvement to themselves, if someone else gets more improvement then them.


 ... by "average" here, then do you mean the lower middle-class? middle-middle class? upper-middle class?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... by "average" here, then do you mean the lower middle-class? middle-middle class? upper-middle class?


The majority of all people. For the rich it doesn't matter, they are well off and better off then most. It is the poor and lower middle class that confuse me. They continuously seem to support policies that hurt economic growth, the only thing that can save them, as long as it reins in the wealth of others.

I didn't read this so called book or article but I have been saying for years that it makes no sense to tax to death the most productive parts of our economy to give it to the least productive. I would rather take a guy earning $1 million per year paying 30% in tax and lower his taxes to 25% and help him earn $3 million per year. That would help the poor significantly, but no one would go for it because some guy they don't even know went from taking home $700,000 after tax to $2.250,000. God forbid he buys a big swimming pool. That has to be stopped...and so does the $450,000 of extra taxes that could have been distributed to the poor.

The above is just a made up example and there would be many exceptions to what happens when you provide a better tax environment for the higher incomes, but one thing that would have a much better chance of happening is GDP would grow, government taxes would grow and programs for the poor would improve...but as I said, we can't have that rich guy getting richer. It appears that it is just not right.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It would be a nice easy fix to economies if lowering taxes for the wealthy and corporations created good paying jobs and capital investment.

Unfortunately, the evidence seems to indicate lowering taxes creates more problems than it solves.

President Reagan lowered taxes and the US deficit ballooned upwards as a result of less revenue for the government. It frustrated Reagan greatly Milton Friedman's plan failed to produce the desired results.

Both former Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and current Liberal Finance Minister Bill Morneau called tax cuts "dead money" that failed to create new jobs or expansion.

Interesting that during the era of President Eisenhower in the 1950s when the US economy was very prosperous and growing, the highest marginal tax rate was 90%.

President Trump lowered tax rates for wealthy and corporations, and it hasn't created new jobs or stopped companies from leaving for Mexico. All it has done is increase the US deficit, which appears to be a common result of lowering taxes.

PM Stephen Harper lowered the GST and corporate taxes and the budget went from surplus to record level deficits.

Ontario's Doug Ford eliminated the carbon tax and the Ontario deficit is rising. He is scrambling to find nickles in the couch.

With these results maybe politicians concerned about the debt should forget about cutting taxes and deal with the deficit in a better way.

Raise taxes and revenues or cut spending. Those involve hard choices that politicians don't want to make. Easier to cut taxes and pretend it solves the problems.

If there are examples of a country lowering taxes and successfully creating an economic boom and jobs, they would be constantly touted as stellar examples.

So far I haven't heard of any examples, although there was a short period of time where Ireland was pointed to as the prime example......"the Celtic Tiger"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Tiger

They lowered taxes and attracted all kinds of corporations. Unfortunately, when the corporations left for greener pastures, Ireland was left with a lot of debt and no money.

Ireland fell into a recession, and then a depression and the "cut taxes" crowd quickly stopped using them as an example.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

This snippet from the article seems timely during a time when considering the choice between cutting spending or raising taxes to balance the budget.

_By mid-2007, in the wake of the growing global financial crisis, the Celtic Tiger had all but died. Some critics, such as David McWilliams, who had been warning about impending collapse for some time, concluded: "The case is clear: an economically challenged government, perniciously influenced by the interests of the housing lobby, blew it. The entire Irish episode will be studied internationally in years to come as an example of how not to do things."

Historian Richard Aldous stated the Celtic Tiger has now gone the "way of the dodo". In early 2008, many commentators thought a soft landing was likely, but by January 2009, it seemed possible the country could experience a depression. In early January 2009, The Irish Times, in an editorial, declared: "We have gone from the Celtic Tiger to an era of financial fear with the suddenness of a Titanic-style shipwreck, thrown from comfort, even luxury, into a cold sea of uncertainty." In February 2010, a report by Davy Research concluded that Ireland had "largely wasted” its years of high income during the boom, with private enterprise investing its wealth "in the wrong places". *It compared Ireland's growth to other small eurozone countries such as Finland and Belgium – noting that the physical wealth of those countries exceeds that of Ireland because of their "vastly superior" transport infrastructure, telecommunications network, and public services.* _

Canada's deficit is largely due to imbedded structural costs for the government for health care, income support for seniors (OAS/GIS), education, infrastructure and military spending.

To cut the spending on "transport infrastructure and public services" would lead to a situation such as Ireland has experienced.

If reduced spending isn't a solution, that leaves raising revenues (taxes and fees) as the only solution.

The question is who will pay the higher taxes ? The poor don't have any money. The middle class is falling behind. That leaves one option.......raise taxes on the wealthy.

"Tax the wealthy" isn't driven by greed. It is the only viable solution to tax those who have the money.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> Eclectic, you’re probably right. My point was more not all tax deductions are at 100% (say a computer purchase), so people pay for the item and still pay taxes on top of that. I’m not an accountant, so I don’t know all the rules, that’s why I hire the accountant...plus he’s a tax write off and I’m providing employment. Unlike those do it yourself people who are trying to unemploy people. P-)


It seems that to make your point - what is a range is being over simplified.

YMMV as to whether the deduction is 100% as it is a range. Similarly, whether new employment is generated is also on a range. Some deductions will generate new employment while others generate the same employment as a regular property owner that does not get a deduction.

As well, while not to the same level as the accountant being mentioned - DIY tax filers who buy tax software are also generating employment. For there to be no employment, the DIY type would have to be filing paper returns or using something like StudioTax without donating anything.


Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

sags said:


> It would be a nice easy fix to economies if lowering taxes for the wealthy and corporations created good paying jobs and capital investment.
> 
> Unfortunately, the evidence seems to indicate lowering taxes creates more problems than it solves.
> 
> President Reagan lowered taxes and the US deficit ballooned upwards as a result of less revenue for the government. It frustrated Reagan greatly Milton Friedman's plan failed to produce the desired results.


The last time I looked, US GDP today is higher then it was in the 80s. You are actually blaming ballooning deficits on the rich. Are you serious. You think that budget money was spent on the rich. Please shake your head, there must be something dislodged.

This is not a strategy where the next year the budgets go to surplus. The rich can't create productivity overnight. No one can. The poor can't do it at all. This can take decades. What I would like to know is how much lingering benefit do you get out of giving a guy who does not want a job more money.

I also did not say take the guys tax rate of 30% and reduce it to 5%. All I am saying is that if all you do is talk about taxing the rich and god forbid you actually do it, at some point you are going to get people to either not bother with new business (especially if they get to 70% tax rates), defer it to next year (lay off a few people while you are waiting), hide the income, or attempt to conduct the business in a lower tax jurisdiction.

Not sure how all that helps the poor but they do seem to like it or they wouldn't keep asking for it.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Sags,

You say Trumps tax cuts didn’t create jobs...another made up “fact”. Apple created 10’s of thousands of new jobs in America (you seem to forget your Canadian, but that’s another matter) last year, Foxconn (who builds Apple products) also opened a factory is the USA. That’s just one company, but I’m sure your uninformed opinion is much more valid than reality. 

If you want to fix government spending, fire all the deadwood, work for welfare staff that clutter the halls. Most of those people, including our prime minister, probably couldn’t get a job in the real world to begin with. Why we support them is mind boggling. 

Eclectic, I’m sure those people who buy a $50 program, or use the free software create some jobs...however my accountant is making 1000’s of dollars just off of me and my companies. The “contribution” to the economy is on a slightly different scale as usual.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just not sure why you wanted to paint DIY tax filing as only one thing.

It is a range ... which doesn't take anything away from the main point.


Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I have always felt that DIY tax filing was one of the most productive things a citizen can do. Tax is probably one of the largest expenses a citizen can have and learning how it works can be one of the more lucrative endeavors a person can conduct. I will agree, it is one of the most boring but still something most people should attempt to understand. 

As for the tax return. Once one knows how it all works, the tax return is pretty easy, especially with free software. I would be going through the return that someone else did more me with a fine tooth comb anyway, so I figure I might as well fill in the blanks. I doubt JAG is doing what he is doing to "create employment" but I can't answer for anyone else. 

I could do my own oil changes as well, but with what Walmart charges as the net savings, I find it better to "create employment" there, but of course, that is not the reason I do it. The final bill of my tax return is quite different amount, however, and doing it myself forces me to keep up to date.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

It was just an example, it wasn’t meant to be the be all an end all of the discussion. I’m not sure why anyone is focusing on it. 

The point, which you seem to miss, is I don’t get to keep any money I “save” with a tax deduction, the money is spent and used to stimulate the economy. It doesn’t go into my pocket, it doesn’t make me richer. I may benefit from it (in terms of time, products, or services) but I don’t get a monetary gain. The government grants tax breaks to encourage people and companies to put money into various areas that they deem important. That’s why contributions to government parties is a lucrative tax break. 

As for the reason I hire an accountant, I don’t have the time or desire to keep up with all the tax changes. I’m sure my tax returns are a lot more complex than optsy’s as well. Multiple Corporate tax returns are a little different than a personal return with a single paycheque.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> ... You say Trumps tax cuts didn’t create jobs...another made up “fact”. Apple created 10’s of thousands of new jobs in America ...


Do you mean Apple plus suppliers and other related jobs?
Apple says they created 6,000 new jobs in 2018 with a future target to hit 20,000 by 2023.




Just a Guy said:


> ... last year, Foxconn (who builds Apple products) also opened a factory is the USA ...


Are there links to this US based Foxconn plan that builds Apple products that opened last year?

What I can find is that the Wisconsin Foxconn factory that was celebrated by Trump. It started with a $3 billion state subsidy for a $10 billion plant that was to hire 13K workers to build panels for 75" TV screens. The breakdown was supposed to be 75% assembly line workers. The ground breaking ceremony which Trump attended was for building a smaller TV screen. In the meantime, the state subsidy climbed to $4.1 billion which the plant was scaled back to an estimated $2.1 billion plant. Foxconn tried to reassure people by pointing out the plan was to to end up with the larger plant, in stages

A short time later, the larger plant was confirmed to be dead where the $2.1 billion one was said to have a short lifetime as Foxconn was not really interested in television. The 75% assembly workers dropped to 10%. The disputed 2018 update says they aren't building a factory but a technology hub. The hiring target for 2020 was to have been 5,200 workers but according to a company source, it is likely more like 1,000 workers.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/29...plant-jobs-deal-subsidy-governor-scott-walker
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...-wisconsin-factory-plans-reconsidering-latest


Unless there's something else that Google isn't finding ... what is being built seems tiny, is expensive to the tax payer, needs a different work force that is reported (initial start up is supposed to be handled by Asian engineers) and never seems to have been slated to build Apple products.

Apparently Foxconn has had a similar pattern of big announcements followed by much smaller investments/factories/jobs triggering Wisconsin locals to wonder why their politicians did not do their homework.




Just a Guy said:


> ... That’s just one company, but I’m sure your uninformed opinion is much more valid than reality.


I'm not sure the opinion or the examples are all that conclusive about the bigger picture in the US.


Cheers


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

How many people did you employ last year? How many jobs did you create?

The comment was the Trump tax cuts didn’t create jobs, I pointed out two companies which credited the tax cuts as being the reason for the 1000s of jobs being created, your complaint seems to be it wasn’t enough. Sorry I didn’t research and list every job created by the tax breaks, sorry I didn’t list every tax deduction available to corporations...but I’m really sorry you can’t seem to see the point of the conversation. 

Not exactly sure why your desperate to nit pick on every point, you’re not disproving anything I actually said, unlike what my posting said.

Here’s an article which says Apple created 450k jobs in America in 2018, if you include spin off companies. Pick your spin doctor. 

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...0-jobs-in-us-in-2018/articleshow/67735260.cms


----------



## Jimmy (May 19, 2017)

sags said:


> It would be a nice easy fix to economies if lowering taxes for the wealthy and corporations created good paying jobs and capital investment.
> 
> Unfortunately, the evidence seems to indicate lowering taxes creates more problems than it solves.
> 
> ...


First of all Reagan's tax cuts resulted in the longest economic expansion in the US since WW2. Unemployment fell from a peak of 10% to 5.4%. He created 16 M jobs. Not sure how those are ' problems' to you. Eventually the deficits were eliminated too by 1995. Your Flaherty quote is also disingenuous. He never said anything about 'dead money' . He actually said the opposite . Corporations had legitimate reason for holding onto more liquidity ( shocker after a credit crisis) and it has not come at the expense of lower investment. 



> “While Canadian non-financial corporations are holding more cash than ever before, they appear to have legitimate business and economic reasons for doing so,” says a summary.
> “The transition towards higher cash holdings and liquidity … has not come at the expense of lower capital investment or dividend payments to shareholders.”


The growth in the 50s was inspite of the high tax rate. It was due to the post war baby boom. You need to learn some basic supply side economics and the Laffer curve instead of pointing to erroneous cause and effects that have no relationship.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Just a Guy said:


> As for the reason I hire an accountant, I don’t have the time or desire to keep up with all the tax changes. I’m sure my tax returns are a lot more complex than optsy’s as well. Multiple Corporate tax returns are a little different than a personal return with a single paycheque.


All the more reason to learn. I know I would still be doing them. If it took too much time, I might let someone else fill in the blanks, but I would want to ensure I understand it all before I signed off.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

You guys seem to think that a government cuts taxes and all of a sudden jobs are created. Jobs are created by a demand for products and the capital and knowledge to provide them. They will be created in the best environment for those jobs. Tax rates are just one component of that, but it is a big one. Raising taxes, certainly is not going to help. Raising minimum wages is certainly not going to help. Forcing companies to pay for a workers retirement, healthcare, vacations, etc., is not going to help.

The problem is that with most of our socialist governments they tend to always want to do the opposite of what might help. I am not saying that we don't do those things. I am just saying it is not going to increase jobs and it definitely is not going to improve the plight of the poor. I wish it would. It might feel like it should, but it won't because it goes against all logic for GDP growth and job growth. All you have to do is put yourself in the mindset of that rich person who is the only one who can create the jobs, in the first place, and think about it for a moment.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> All the more reason to learn. I know I would still be doing them. If it took too much time, I might let someone else fill in the blanks, but I would want to ensure I understand it all before I signed off.


Well, I could spend time making money, employing people, providing affordable housing, etc. doing the things I know how to do well or I could take time away from that to learn one of the most convoluted pieces of legislation ever written instead of hiring someone who specializes in it. I know the basics of the tax code, but I’m far from an expert. 

You could get some books on surgery too, I’ve got many medical relatives, but funny thing is, they still don’t operate on themselves for some reason.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Just a Guy said:


> Well, I could spend time making money, employing people, providing affordable housing, etc. doing the things I know how to do well or I could take time away from that to learn one of the most convoluted pieces of legislation ever written instead of hiring someone who specializes in it. I know the basics of the tax code, but I’m far from an expert.
> 
> You could get some books on surgery too, I’ve got many medical relatives, but funny thing is, they still don’t operate on themselves for some reason.


Fair enough. Good point. 

Still can't believe your relatives would waste the time of other medical professionals when they could just hack out those gallbladders themselves. LOL.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I also took math in school where two plus two equaled 4 not a 3 million dollar loss.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Just a Guy said:


> Well, I could spend time making money, employing people, providing affordable housing, etc. doing the things I know how to do well or I could take time away from that to learn one of the most convoluted pieces of legislation ever written instead of hiring someone who specializes in it. I know the basics of the tax code, but I’m far from an expert.
> 
> You could get some books on surgery too, I’ve got many medical relatives, but funny thing is, they still don’t operate on themselves for some reason.


I'm reminded of the story about a guy who was a travel writer and got into a conversation with another guy at a bar in some vacation resort area. 

After some pleasantries, the one guys says to the other, 'so what do you do for a living?' and the guy replies, 'I'm a travel writer.' The first guys says, 'oh really, you know I've always thought that when I retired I would like to do some writing.' The second guys says, 'So what do you do for a living' and gets the response, 'I'm a brain surgeon.' Then the writer say, 'oh really, you know I've always thought that when I retired I would like to try doing some brain surgery.'

Whether it's doing your taxes or repairing your car, there are some things best left to those that are the experts. That you could learn perhaps how to do THEIR job, doesn't mean it is a good idea to do so. The world is full of amateurs doing a bad job of something.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail....there are more ways to make money than a job, if you can’t see that it’s your problem not ours. If I want a raise, I make a raise for myself, if I don’t like a task, I don’t do it or hire someone else...I don’t whine about how unfair life is, I grew up a long time ago.


----------



## :) lonewolf (Feb 9, 2020)

Politicians are attracted to money like flies to cow pies. Money & corruption has given Gates a monopoly on health & control of much of the media. He is following the playbook of Rockefeller to be viewed favorably in the public eye giving money away that really has another motive & will make money. Do not kid yourself Gates intentions are pure evil with the money he has given the WHO, Fauci Big Pharma to name a few to play with.

The conditioning

Step 1 caution masks required to enter

Step 2 caution vaccination required to enter

Step 3 caution implanted digital tracking ID required to enter


----------



## :) lonewolf (Feb 9, 2020)

Longtimeago said:


> .




Whether it's doing your taxes or repairing your car, there are some things best left to those that are the experts. That you could learn perhaps how to do THEIR job, doesn't mean it is a good idea to do so. The world is full of amateurs doing a bad job of something.
[/QUOTE]

I will never let anyone pitch hit my thinking. Thinking is a selfish act of complex logical identification that can only be performed by the individual mind.

I never say to my self "Who am I to think in judge if it is good enough for the scientists its good enough for me", Instead I say who is feeding the scientists to have a biased agenda. Do not bite the hand that feeds you. Those feeding the scientist i.e., WHO now have a monopoly on world health


----------

