Guru
From my perspective, it is not jealousy, but expedience since the wealthy simply have more to tax than someone in official poverty in our capital based, mixed market, political economy.
In any case, I believe that the very wealthy have no real cause for concern, even if they paid wartime tax rates during times of war, even if only on abstractions; simply because they already have enough money to make more money than they would pay in taxes if they choose to.
Originally Posted by danielpalos
ex·pe·di·ent adj \ik-ˈspē-dē-ənt\
Definition of EXPEDIENT
: characterized by concern with what is opportune; especially : governed by self-interest
Henry George's theories were based on land ownership and how far a business was from a public resource like a mill or waterway. The man lived and died a decade before the model T was produced much less modern transportation and communication. Not only did Henry George never hear of the Internet, he barely lived long enough to see the electric light. Applying the theories of Henry George to modern nations is about as risky as letting the most brilliant caveman design your next airport.
I agree with what you said in your first sentence. But applying the rest of what you said to this discussion is misleading. I find it unjust to seize the property of those who committed no crime and unjust to feed only those who are unwilling to feed themselves.
Henry George's theories were based on land ownership and how far a business was from a public resource like a mill or waterway. The man lived and died a decade before the model T was produced much less modern transportation and communication. Not only did Henry George never hear of the Internet, he barely lived long enough to see the electric light. Applying the theories of Henry George to modern nations is about as risky as letting the most brilliant caveman design your next airport.
Guru
It's the greed of the rich.
No, most people want justice. But you don't. Simple.Most people want what other people have.
That's a false and absurd claim with no basis in fact.In this case, since they don't have it, they want to punish those who do.
No, it's the nature of the greedy, privileged, parasitic rich.It's human nature.
The rich pay about an order of magnitude more taxes than the poor -- but two orders of magnitude more benefit from government.The rich actually do pay more taxes.
That is a bald falsehood.They pay the great majority of all income taxes collected.
The greed of the rich is insatiable, as proved by the fact that they have taken trillions from taxpayers since the crisis in 2008, actually increasing their wealth, while ordinary working people have lost ground. Watch "Inside Job" and try to get some kind of clue.But that isn't enough to satisfy jealousy and greed. Jealousy and greed are insatiable.
Guru
Ah, I see. So, in what you are no doubt pleased to call your "mind," all the greedy, idle, privileged, parasitic rich have to do to make their thievery "just" is buy enough politicians to make it "not a crime" to steal from the productive by owning unjust privileges. I.e., as the slave owners of the antebellum South had "committed no crime" by owning slaves and forcibly compelling them to labor without wages, you would find it "unjust" for government to "seize" their "property" by emancipating the slaves.
Somehow, I kinda figured it'd be something like that.
That would be the greedy, idle, privileged, parasitic rich. Almost all the poor are willing to feed themselves. They are just deprived of the opportunity to do so by the rich who own those opportunities.and unjust to feed only those who are unwilling to feed themselves.
Guru
Special pleading much?
: suitable for achieving a particular end in a given circumstance
Analyst
I agree with that other stuff you wrote, but how is it false to claim that the rich pay the majority of income tax?
Certainly, the income tax is not the only tax that people pay, and certainly, as a percentage of wealth, the richest in America pay a lot less.
But last time I checked, as an absolute value, and even as a percentage of personal income, the rich did pay the majority of income taxes.
Are you factoring in benefits from the government that are not recorded as income?
-Meta
Analyst
How is it misleading?
It is the law that decides what a crime is, and if one goes against the law, say by not voluntarily giving up government created currency,I find it unjust to seize the property of those who committed no crime...
then they are generally committing a crime, though that's not necessarily to say that the law is always right, wouldn't you agree?
What do you mean by this?...and unjust to feed only those who are unwilling to feed themselves.
-Meta
Because the justification you offer for discrimination is a persons "participation in some damaging action" or that they are criminals. I don't feel either of those exceptions applies to folks who simply have a higher income than their neighbor. Since those exceptions don't seem to apply, I find it misleading to use them as justification in this discussion.
Henry George's theories were based on land ownership and how far a business was from a public resource like a mill or waterway. The man lived and died a decade before the model T was produced much less modern transportation and communication. Not only did Henry George never hear of the Internet, he barely lived long enough to see the electric light. Applying the theories of Henry George to modern nations is about as risky as letting the most brilliant caveman design your next airport.
The discrimination is in deciding who must give up more wealth. You can't argue that you selected folks for this sacrifice based on their response to being selected.
Also, that the government created the currency is irrelevant. The currency is simply a public marker, it's generic IOUs for the value that exchanged for it. When you seize the currency, you're really seizing the value that the individuals provided in exchange for it -- and the government didn't create that value.
Henry George's theories were based on land ownership and how far a business was from a public resource like a mill or waterway. The man lived and died a decade before the model T was produced much less modern transportation and communication. Not only did Henry George never hear of the Internet, he barely lived long enough to see the electric light. Applying the theories of Henry George to modern nations is about as risky as letting the most brilliant caveman design your next airport.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Bookmarks