Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
You know, I've done some thinking about it, and it is coercion to force rich people to give money to the poor, but I don't care.
|
It would be possible to respond with some libertarian guff here, but I'll let the point slide.
Quote:
And here's why:
Rich people do not work harder than poor people.
|
I could work hard breaking rocks all day. Would I deserve to be paid as much as a brain surgeon for it? Scratch that, would I even deserve to be paid as much as someone who spends just one hour a day doing something
useful?
I'm not arguing with the possibility that someone or some group may decide to reward me for that activity. But that decision should be made voluntarily by those who think it's useful and should be based on the benefit they think it will provide. Otherwise we're just whores who expect to be paid for masturbating too (oh my, I'm saving that one).
Quote:
Rich people cannot exist without the labor of poor people.
|
And your point is?
Quote:
Minimum living standards are more important than a luxury.
|
Now you're getting somewhere. But you haven't defined those minimum standards. Do you mean a minimum amount of money, or minimum access to (tax-funded) services?
Quote:
A minority of the people should not be allowed to control the world's natural resources.
|
Utter nonsense. If we're talking about natural resources, 99.9% of us have no inclination or idea of what to do with them, so we leave that to people who do. A lump of metal is useless to me, I'd rather it was owned by someone who could manufacture something I
do want from it.
If we're talking about money, well, this is a subject for another thread. Suffice to say that most people's single biggest expenditure is tax, and the state is the only body capable of
forcing you to pay for things.
Quote:
No human being is intrinsically worth more than another.
|
Define 'intrinsic'. If I want my car repaired, a trained mechanic is a lot more useful to me than a poet. If I want my photograph taken, a photographer is more use than a plumber. And if I want a star player for my football team, Wayne Rooney is more use than my gran.
Quote:
Everyone in a large society is coerced to oblige themselves to society in one form in another, and I'd say that poor people more so than rich people; so putting a bit more coercion on the latter is only making things more equitable.
|
Please don't use words you don't understand. "Coercion" refers specifically to the force of law. A just law coerces everybody equally, and only as far as is necessary to ensure that people do not infringe each other's rights. So I am "coerced" to not walk off with your TV. Such laws should apply equally to everyone. We may voluntarily choose to place extra requirements on ourselves, by signing contracts and agreements or choosing to live by particular rules and accepting an authority to enforce them. But this is voluntary.
Quote:
Right now I think poor people are coerced to support the wealth of rich people, why is that not considered a breach of people's freedom?
|
You're getting at something with this bit, but only just. I think you're probably referring to poor people being exploited by wealthy people, based on the capital == exploitation principle. But your solution is that they should continue to be exploited but given a few benefits to make it a bit less shit?
Also, the "breach of freedom" stuff is nonsense. What freedom is being breached? People work voluntarily and there's even a welfare system which, generally, gives them the option of not working if they really can't bear to work.
In my view, government is horrendously bad at solving these problems. If they just did simple redistribution it wouldn't be so bad, but the whole thing is designed to keep people going along as happy consumers, buying enough crap to keep the retail economy going. In return, the moment they take a bit of initiative and do something for themselves, the government starts clawing every penny back (and more).
And don't even think about trying to experiment with different ways of living. The state is designed to support big businesses employing lots of little people. Anyone who deviates too far will find that the state really has no interest in supporting them, and will actively oppose their efforts to find alternative ways of supporting themselves.