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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (145330)	11/4/2008 11:16:57 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

In this case my generalization isn't perfect, some rich people are idle rich (OTOH if you earned it earlier and are now idle then you formerly created wealth, and if you inherited it, the person you inherited it from created wealth, and gave it to you, you didn't take it from society), and worse yet some really are parasites on society, criminals, fraudsters, rent seekers and such. But while imperfect the generalization is valid. As a group the wealthy produce a lot. Without their actions and efforts we would be much worse off. In total they add to society, even if some of them take away from it. Also the more we try to raise taxes, impose extensive regulation, and generally intervene in the economy the more you get the last type of "rich parasite" that I mentioned, rent-seekers (basically people who manipulate the government to their advantage to get wealthy, they regulate away their competition, or get subsidies etc.)