View Single Post
  #10  
Old November 17, 2008, 03:19 AM
MichaelRoss
 
Posts: n/a
Default No-One Owes Anyone Else - Rich or Poor

Todd,

Thanks for putting the cat among the flying rats.

First, I want definitions. Before Anyone bags the rich, define Who these Rich are. Define these poor.

By using such a generic term as Rich and Poor, pollies Know people will think anyone who earns more than them are the Rich and they themselves are either poor or just above it in middle class. And it hides the true nature of the argument - taking the unearned in the first place. It stops being about Take / Not take to about being How Much To Take.

"What the rich DO owe, is taxes. "

According to Whom? And by what right? Pete.

Income Tax is nothing but Income Theft. To say, after I work my bunns off all day, that part of the fruits of my labor are Owed to someone else for no other reason than They Said, is akin to advocating Slavery. And to Take that money from me is Theft. Plain and simple. I doesn't matter what fancy term you use for it, nor your Reason for it.

E.g. Is it right or wrong for me to come into your house and under threat of violence, take money from your wallet?

I hope you said "wrong".

What if I ask someone on my behalf to do it?

Again, I hope you said "wrong".

So if *I* as an individual cannot do it, by what right does a group of individuals who call themselves Govt have to do the same thing in essence?

Side Note: All this talk about Bailout Money for the economy is BS. You want an economy to flourish? Don't give back the money you stole on a selective basis. Instead, let people Keep the fruits of their labor. Do not tax their income. Plain and simple. THAT will get the economy going.

Onward.

"You have to take the good with the bad"

Why Steve? Why do I Have to? Saying so is admitting that you think the govt can manage your money better than you and make better decisions with it. But you already say you disagree with how they spend Some of this money of yours they stole.

"Sure, he has a little nicer place to live, drives a little nicer car, but when it comes right down to it, both of us like to spend our time fishing and hunting. I told him... I don't want to make any more money. I'm happy where I'm at, and it gives me plenty of free time to enjoy things that I want to do."

This nicer car and place of your friends... nicer according to ?

"I don't want to make any more money"

So you're saying, if there was a way for you to make 50% more than you do now, without doing anything extra and by still doing exactly what you're doing now, you'd knock that back?

What happens in ten years when everyone else is earning more and prices are higher. You'll still be happy with your current income, seeing as you don't want to earn more?

Maybe you actually Mean something different. I don't know. I only have what you said to go by.

Money isn't everything?

No, it's not, Steve. But it's only ever said - given forth - by people who have resigned themselves to never having a Lot (however much a Lot is). No different resignation than those who say they'd rather be healthy than wealthy (why not both?). Or said by those with money who are trying to garner some kind of empathy with those they are telling it to.

E.g. Bill Myers saying when you have money you quickly discover how unimportant money is. If that's so, why doesn't he give his products away? Why does he still do stuff to make money? Because money IS important (his actions negate his words). And if you think it is so unimportant, give all yours away and go live in a tent in the middle of the bush (oh, he tried that already before he had money, decided it was better to have money after all).

Tallman's mistake is saying the money is an IOU back. It ain't. The moment those who buy movie tickets have handed the money over for the ticket, they are considering the transaction complete. They have exchanged one value (money) for another value (entertainment). They owe nothing to the movie producer and nor does the producer owe anything back. They have exchanged equal value in Their own eyes.

"Frankly, if the rich paid their way, in the way that middle class folks do, folks wouldn't have to cope with so much corruption and greed,"

Whoa up there Sandi. Paid their way? How so? Please explain how the Rich do not pay their way but the middle class do?

Greed and corruption come when it involves Taking from others without voluntary mutual consent free of coercion. When someone can grant or remove Permission for you to do something, it leads to corruption. That Power leads to greed. Because nothing is earned in a rightful way.

"the wealthys' 'fair share' would pay for a lot of it."

Fair Share? According to whom? And by what logic does someone who has already worked their way into a position of Having, suddenly owe anything to those below who are still coming up - or trying to come up - and to those who choose not to go anywhere?

"That's where the tax breaks should be, folks...for those who need the income the most to provide for life and health."

Who determines this Need of yours? Who is the arbiter of what someone Needs to provide for their life and health?

There should be no income tax, period. Otherwise, you are Punishing effort and rewarding laziness. And believe it is right to take that which you did not earn.

A person who earns $20k will pay, let's say for Example Sake Only, $4k tax. A person on $100k, if they pay the same Percentage, will pay $20k in tax - as much as the other person earned. So Already, they are paying More Money in tax.

To then turn around and say, well, you made $100k so can Afford to pay more in tax and so will, is now making people not equal. I don't care if they can Afford more tax. More money, higher percentage. They DID have more income to Spend which is what makes an economy flourish.

Look. It's simple. NOTHING happens until someone spends money.

Imagine a kingdom where the King has money and the plebs have nothing. The economy is still. The only way the economy will move and the plebs will get money is if they exchange some of their labor for the king's money. The only way that will happen is if the king wants something done - new garden, new building, whatever. Until the person with money is willing to spend it, nothing happens. And anyone with money, become the king in miniature - able to have stuff done (haircut for example).

If you Take the money away, they have nothing to spend, do they? So nothing then happens.

ALL the problems stem from the belief there is some Magic Right to the unearned.

If you are having problems grasping the concept, that there is no right to other people's labor fruits, trying watching this youtube on The Philosophy of Liberty http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I (8 minutes)

Michael Ross

Last edited by MichaelRoss : November 17, 2008 at 06:47 AM.
Reply With Quote