The Citizens Manifesto Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Citizens Manifesto

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Elroy who wrote (309)	7/25/2005 3:13:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 492

If the population as a whole would be better off if it were taken away, it should be taken away. I disagree with both the principle, and the assumption behind your plan for applying it. Uncertain, but perceived benefit to "the group", doesn't in my opinion generally justify increasing confiscation of wealth or otherwise restricting individual freedom. People can perceive a benefit to society from just about any government action, or claim one when the action would help them even if they don't actually perceive a benefit. I would set the bar higher than that. Not that property rights automatically trump all other considerations. A certain amount of taxation and general government interference is probably needed to maintain an orderly society. Also in extreme cases a larger degree of infringement against property rights may be justified, but we are not talking about an extreme case here. In any case I don't agree that the group does benefit from seizing wealth from the wealthy, even if they inherited it. "Its their money". Is the most important issue in this case, IMO. Going beyond "leaving it at that", is just adding more detail to the same assertion. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next