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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (21716)	5/18/1998 7:35:00 AM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

X, But by tempering capitalism a little bit, by giving up a bit of one's economic wealth, one buys social stability and a measure of peace. I think it was Toynbee, the historian, who said that taxes are the price we pay to prevent revolution. But this can go too far. I agree that totally unbridled capitalism is untenable. All of the wealth would soon shift into a very few hands, and after a generation or two, those holding the power would be those who did not earn it and may not be worthy or have the sense of "noblesse oblige" which their forefathers may have had. A blueprint for despotism. Our current trend toward managed health care is an example. We jumped out of the Clinton frying pan of government care into the Republican fire of profit-only, insurance company run HMO care. If they would let us have a true private system, then the market forces would prevail, but employees don't really have much choice, and once they are in a plan they are usually stuck there for a long time. It's a complex problem. Jack

To: epicure who wrote (21716)	5/18/1998 10:20:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 108807

X: Please tell me of all the people in the USA who "lived in gutters" before your wonderful "safety nets" were put into place before the 1960s. Also please tell me what gives you the "right" to condone that others legislate away part of my wealth to give as enforced alms to those some committee, board or mob (of which I have no input in whatsoever) decrees those that are "fit" or "unfit". Also please tell me how their perceived need supercedes my right to the things that I produce through my own efforts. And please tell me how it is freedom -- in that if I don't comply I am threatened with force for not allowing myself to be robbed? Father Terrence

To: epicure who wrote (21716)	5/22/1998 12:53:00 AM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

X, your post in response to Terrence, about giving up a little of our wealth to live in a society which is civilized--where beggars don't live in the street and kidnapping for profit is not a common occurrence--was brilliant. I would have written a post with similar sentiments, because I agree with you, but now it isn't necessary. I wonder if there is any positive correlation between the willingness to be taxed to a reasonable degree to buy social stability and peace, and whether one has children. Probably not, but I do think wanting to protect the world for future generations is a strong motivating factor in much of the environmental movement, for example.