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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thames_sider who wrote (90332)	10/16/2008 1:23:45 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 541777

thames slide; It is the choice of a government to redistribute wealth, that's basically what a government does. Interesting comment. I suppose as you collect more from the rich and build a road that the poor use just as much as the rich - that is a redistribution. But who argues against that? Personally I feel the only one in the world which has it about right is Norway. Ever been there? My gosh but they have it good compared to us in many ways! It's not just that they redistribute - it's that they understand that government is there for the people. The more I listen the more I think maybe Obama gets that. Norwegians don't pay more taxes than us - it's just that the money is used for the people rather than wandering off to do nation building and ......................special favors for self empoyeed plumbers. steve

To: thames_sider who wrote (90332)	10/16/2008 2:08:31 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541777

I don't think anyone has made them an entitlement. Say what? Try taking some government handout away and see if you don't see protest signs claiming you can't do that because people are entitled to it. Now if you think that taxes on income are too high (or too low), that seems to me a separate argument altogether. Actually, I can't get too exercised over tax rates. but not at the point of payment Nor about whether people get more or less than they paid in. I don't mind the actual distribution, it's the notion of automatic eligibility by reason of citizenship or simply being a human being. For example, is everyone entitled to own a home? Some people think so. If they can't buy a home on their own, then the taxpayers should subsidize it. I know someone who thinks people have a right to medical care for their pets if they can't afford it since pets are healthy to have and, after all, people are entitled to health care whether they can afford it or not so this is just an extension. There are some who think all those suffering people in Africa have a human right to AIDS medication. That's an entitlement based on simply being a live human being, one that imposes a financial burden on someone else. A while back we had a civil rights movement where people fought for the right to be served at the local pancake house. At that time, it never occurred to anyone that not only should they have a legal right to not be turned away but a right to free food. Somehow we have evolved to thinking that people have the right to all sorts of things. The notion of charity has been replaced by the notion of entitlement. I don't find that healthy. That's why I try to draw a line on entitlements. I have no objection to offering a charitable hand. Folks can have the handout. It's acceding to the notion of the right to the handout where I draw the line.

To: thames_sider who wrote (90332)	10/16/2008 5:11:16 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541777

>>Now if you think that taxes on income are too high (or too low), that seems to me a separate argument altogether. And pretty well every government seems surprisingly confident that its spending - its redistribution, spread and degree - is in the interests of the majority of people... Personally I feel the only one in the world which has it about right is Norway.<< TS - Ah, Norway. An incredibly beautiful place. I believe they do have an enlightened government there, but they also have a major advantage that the United States doesn't have, which is a huge (though I believe declining) state income from North Sea oil. In the latter way, Norway is like Alaska. It would be great if the US could afford to give all its citizens the cushy benefits Norwegians get, without taxing them into the ground. Sadly, we can't. I'm not contradicting your point, by the way. Just trying to add another dimension. - Allen