These charts have so totally convinced me that I should be poor. I mean look at it, if I were poor I would be living life high on the hog of poverty! I'd barely have to pay taxes, and the government would cut me a small cheque so I could maybe pay my rent or eat for the month, and I'd like, have to do nothing at all for it. And if I worked the government would just want to give me less money so I can't easily work my way up to being rich again.
It almost seems as if the rich (who have a God given right to own more resources than the dirty poor) are paying more for the privilege of owning more than other people. What an odd concept!
Wealth is created by individuals, not the government. Rich people earn their wealth by providing services that other people value. The wealth a person has is a measure of their contribution to the economy, it is not something that the government has blessed them with. When you've produced more than others, owning more is not a "privilege", it is a right.
So we take more from the people who contribute more, and give the loot to people who contribute less. I wonder what sort of incentives that creates?
Of course, I wouldn't expect Saskboy to understand that, since he obviously thinks that wealth flows forth from the government, and all property is simply the bounty that our beloved rulers have dispensed upon us. With that kind of idiotic worldview, it makes perfect sense to take from the rich and give to the poor.
Ryan, how many sick people does Paris Hilton treat in a day?
How many fires do MLB players fight in a year?
What kind of food does Conrad Black make to feed people?
If production of wealth is the pinnacle of human achievement, then what is wealth. I'd suggest that your definition of wealth doesn't feed a nation, it feeds an individual. What a lonely world view you have, that only individuals matter. Clearly joint efforts can build very amazing things, so hopefully you open your eyes to that at some point and work with other people to create wealth everyone can use.
"If production of wealth is the pinnacle of human achievement, then what is wealth."
Whatever people are willing to pay for. That's decided by each person, not by you. If a star athlete provides entertainment for millions of people, their contribution is a whole lot greater than the average firefighter, farmer, police officer, steel worker, or even a doctor.
"Ryan, how many sick people does Paris Hilton treat in a day?
How many fires do MLB players fight in a year?
What kind of food does Conrad Black make to feed people?"
So your definition of wealth is limited to food, medicine, fire control, etc? I think all those hundreds of millions of people who pay for MLB tickets, stay at Hilton hotels, or read Conrad Black's newspapers would disagree with you.
In reality, people have their own preferences about what they'd like other people to be doing for them, and pay accordingly. You don't like it that some people get paid a lot for doing things that you don't think are worthwhile, and say that they're not actually productive. I say that it's their customers who decide that, and frankly it's none of your damn business if you don't like what they do for a living. The huge incomes of star athletes (for example) show that people would rather those individuals be playing sports than doing things like fighting fires, practicing medicine, or growing food.
"I'd suggest that your definition of wealth doesn't feed a nation, it feeds an individual."
That's just retarded. Nations are nothing more than a group of individuals. Feed the individuals, and the nation is fed.
"What a lonely world view you have, that only individuals matter."
Show me someone who isn't an individual. Hmmm... looks like "individuals" includes just about everybody, doesn't it? I'm so lonely here with just me and the other six and a half billion individuals in the world.
Whenever people take the focus off of individuals, it opens the door for collectivist sacrifices. You get Stalin's Five Year Plan.
"Clearly joint efforts can build very amazing things"
No doubt about that, and there is absolutely no better system for coordinating the efforts of millions of human beings than free market capitalism. People who have never even met acting in concert under a system that rewards them for pursuing their own economic interests, and which synchronizes their economic interests with the production of goods or services that other people want. The way to get ahead in a free market is to efficiently provide things that other people want. Perhaps you've heard of the Invisible Hand? It's giving you the finger.
Until you realize that free markets are the pinnacle of productive human cooperation, you'll always wander back into some tired collectivist premise that individuals don't matter, that there are no trees but only forests.
6 comments:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/03/tax_foundation__4.html
In other news, democrats pass largest tax increase in history.
I wonder if I will benefit...
These charts have so totally convinced me that I should be poor. I mean look at it, if I were poor I would be living life high on the hog of poverty! I'd barely have to pay taxes, and the government would cut me a small cheque so I could maybe pay my rent or eat for the month, and I'd like, have to do nothing at all for it. And if I worked the government would just want to give me less money so I can't easily work my way up to being rich again.
It almost seems as if the rich (who have a God given right to own more resources than the dirty poor) are paying more for the privilege of owning more than other people. What an odd concept!
Wealth is created by individuals, not the government. Rich people earn their wealth by providing services that other people value. The wealth a person has is a measure of their contribution to the economy, it is not something that the government has blessed them with. When you've produced more than others, owning more is not a "privilege", it is a right.
So we take more from the people who contribute more, and give the loot to people who contribute less. I wonder what sort of incentives that creates?
Of course, I wouldn't expect Saskboy to understand that, since he obviously thinks that wealth flows forth from the government, and all property is simply the bounty that our beloved rulers have dispensed upon us. With that kind of idiotic worldview, it makes perfect sense to take from the rich and give to the poor.
Ryan, how many sick people does Paris Hilton treat in a day?
How many fires do MLB players fight in a year?
What kind of food does Conrad Black make to feed people?
If production of wealth is the pinnacle of human achievement, then what is wealth. I'd suggest that your definition of wealth doesn't feed a nation, it feeds an individual. What a lonely world view you have, that only individuals matter. Clearly joint efforts can build very amazing things, so hopefully you open your eyes to that at some point and work with other people to create wealth everyone can use.
"If production of wealth is the pinnacle of human achievement, then what is wealth."
Whatever people are willing to pay for. That's decided by each person, not by you. If a star athlete provides entertainment for millions of people, their contribution is a whole lot greater than the average firefighter, farmer, police officer, steel worker, or even a doctor.
"Ryan, how many sick people does Paris Hilton treat in a day?
How many fires do MLB players fight in a year?
What kind of food does Conrad Black make to feed people?"
So your definition of wealth is limited to food, medicine, fire control, etc? I think all those hundreds of millions of people who pay for MLB tickets, stay at Hilton hotels, or read Conrad Black's newspapers would disagree with you.
In reality, people have their own preferences about what they'd like other people to be doing for them, and pay accordingly. You don't like it that some people get paid a lot for doing things that you don't think are worthwhile, and say that they're not actually productive. I say that it's their customers who decide that, and frankly it's none of your damn business if you don't like what they do for a living. The huge incomes of star athletes (for example) show that people would rather those individuals be playing sports than doing things like fighting fires, practicing medicine, or growing food.
"I'd suggest that your definition of wealth doesn't feed a nation, it feeds an individual."
That's just retarded. Nations are nothing more than a group of individuals. Feed the individuals, and the nation is fed.
"What a lonely world view you have, that only individuals matter."
Show me someone who isn't an individual. Hmmm... looks like "individuals" includes just about everybody, doesn't it? I'm so lonely here with just me and the other six and a half billion individuals in the world.
Whenever people take the focus off of individuals, it opens the door for collectivist sacrifices. You get Stalin's Five Year Plan.
"Clearly joint efforts can build very amazing things"
No doubt about that, and there is absolutely no better system for coordinating the efforts of millions of human beings than free market capitalism. People who have never even met acting in concert under a system that rewards them for pursuing their own economic interests, and which synchronizes their economic interests with the production of goods or services that other people want. The way to get ahead in a free market is to efficiently provide things that other people want. Perhaps you've heard of the Invisible Hand? It's giving you the finger.
Until you realize that free markets are the pinnacle of productive human cooperation, you'll always wander back into some tired collectivist premise that individuals don't matter, that there are no trees but only forests.
In the meantime, go read "I, Pencil".
http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
Post a Comment