Success Happy

Do you think the most successful should pay for the least successful to live? Is it their responsibility?

If so how and when did it become their job to provide care for other peoples families?

Public Comments

1. I really don't think that being born into a wealthy family or simply receiving corporate welfare counts as being the most successful, sorry.
2. I have no problem with the wealthy sharing their excess bounty with those less fortunate. The people who know you must think you're a swell guy....
3. Yes. When the most successful decided to hire the less successful as employees. The most successful is milking their success from the labor of the less successful and hasn't been paying them a very fair wage in return.
4. When the "most successful" earn their wealth from the "least successful", there should be SOME quid pro quo. But you are playing semantics and generalizing, as always...
5. When they gained consciousness. How have you not figured out that other people are just as important as you are?
6. Yes. I think we should confiscate all those homes that Rich, Hollywood Liberals own. Let's see how they like the Socialism they so dearly love to pretend to embrace.
7. Considering that their risky investments have been what lead to the failing of our economy and high unemployment levels time and time again, I'd say it IS their responsibility. They make large risks that involve consumer dollars and then fail. If that weren't enough, they give themselves very large bonuses despite their failure that has affected millions of people. So, through no fault of their own, the working class get's stiffed again. I don't mind ONE bit if we take tax dollars from them to provide social safety nets. Their greed leads to everyone's downfall.
8. If they can't take social responsibility then they should not be successful, success is earned not deserved...
9. The European Royalty thought the same way until the French and Russian revolutions got the attention of the wealthy of the world that it might be in their best interest to give some of their wealth back to those who might not have the same wealth producing skills they do but work hard nonetheless. This country is a society (go look up the definition), not an accumulation of individuals.
10. In a society with ANY soul, we do have a responsibility to provide the most basic of human needs to our downtrodden brethren; even if they did bring the situation upon themselves. Food, clothing, clean water, a roof, and basic medical care. We do NOT, on the other hand; have ANY responsibility for their phone bill, plasma TV, car, booze, drugs, tattoos, cable bill, day care, Disney-logo pajamas, hair care products, psychological counseling, or candy bars. Bring back the poor farm. It's the only way to eliminate the waste & instill a sense of self-worth. If we are going to providing each with their needs, then we need to be assured that they are trying to the best of their ability. Once you are capable of going beyond that, you have graduated from a feeble Marxist to a proud capitalist. Teach them to crawl, and they will walk on their own. That said; the self-sufficient should also not be paying to bail out the most successful either. If they can't perform what they thought they could, then we have a place for former AIG execs & Bernie Madolff's entire family in the poor farm as well, after all their assets are confiscated to repay those that they fleeced. We surely won't discriminate against them; that would be cruel.
11. Only if the ones that are unsuccessful have no real alternative. Special needs, veterans, genuine health related cases. Everyone else should be obligated to prove their claims. Too many people abuse the system and sit on their butts at home with no legitimate medical reasons. Businesses which fail should be allowed to fail. Why give more money to a business which has proven their lack of money management. Give someone new a chance. It's humane to take care of each other regardless of social and economical status. However, this should exclude everyone who is lazy, fraudulent and simply doesn't care about improving their own situation. Competition drives ingenuity. We were born free and living in anything other then a competitive democracy is simply enslavement. Like they say ... "Live Free or Die Hard!"
12. No. And no. It's ignorant and ridiculous for people to assume that all those who are financially successful ONLY became successful by robbing others or by inheriting wealth that was robbed from others. Should the super smart student, or the super hard-working student be forced to share out their grades with those who aren't as smart or who decline to study 6 hrs a night? Should the person who works overtime each week to purchase a superior wardrobe be forced to pass that wardrobe out to those who cannot work longer hours or who decline to work longer hours? Acceptance and understanding of risk/reward, effort/reward, ability/reward is something people need to get through their thick heads. There ARE people who aren't as smart, aren't as talented, aren't as skilled, aren't as driven, aren't as ambitious, aren't as hard-working, aren't as educated, aren't as able to live off 4 hrs of sleep per night, aren't as willing or able to put family time 2nd.... I'm really sick of people whining about unequal outcomes while ignoring the fact that people are unequal.
13. the most successful people have acquired their money off the sweat of someone making less than 8 bucks per hour. hell yes they should help the less fortunte.success in this country depends on the minimum wage . just ask any succesful republican.