Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (323945)	1/31/2007 3:19:25 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1577191

I can't believe you don't see it. You demean yourself by defending a group of people who don't need defending and who would spit on you rather than look at you. Defending the rights of people who "would spit on me rather than look at me", doesn't demean me. More importantly the wealthy are hardly a universally hostile group. If you meant your comment literally, I imagine I'd be far more likely to be spit on by the very poor than by the wealthy. If you meant it figuratively, I still see no reason to see the wealthy as so much more hostile then everyone else. Also I'm not just defending the wealthy. High tax rates and heavy regulation effect more than just the wealthy. Furthermore your point about "people who don't need defending" isn't accurate. They may be wealthy but we live in a democracy not an oligarchy. The wealthy are at risk of attack by the non-wealthy, and high tax rates and ideas for limiting maximum salaries or maximum total compensation are in effect and attack on the wealthy, and those with high income who are in the process of becoming wealthy but don't have a great amount of wealth yet. I see.....its better that Paris Hilton has a closet full of clothes rather than building a new highway or a new school or a new hospital. Paris Hilton's clothes could hardly fund a new highway. Your not clearing out Paris Hilton's closet in order to build a school or highway, your taking the wealth of many people, most of whom don't resemble Parish Hilton, and in doing so you are reducing their incentive and ability to create new wealth. You are reducing the incentive for hard work, your reducing and distorting the incentive for investment. "Going beyond what is implied by that statement - I do think that if the system they worked in was different, many teachers would do a better job, but the system is as much a political decision as it is the result of the teachers' or even the administrators' actions." I don't think that's very true. Sure there are some politics involved but there are politics in every work entity. The politics are not just internal school district politics (which might not be any greater than other places of employment, but also national and state and local politics in general. Political decisions on those levels determined how school systems would be set up.