[extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing asdownregulators

Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com
Mon Nov 1 15:56:41 UTC 2004


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Hal Finney wrote:
> 
> > ....  How much should we feel obligated to give to help the poor?
> > This is the question of wealth and redistribution, applied at the
> > personal level, and it's a hard question indeed.
>  
> > Some might argue that we should give all of our wealth until we are
> > at the same level of the poor we have donated to.  In this way, one
> > life is made more difficult, while many others are greatly
> improved.
> >
> > The net happiness in the world would almost certainly be increased
> > if each of us adopted this policy.
>  
> > How can we turn away from this logic? 
> 
> With respect its not logic. It is a castle in the air. 

Quite so. It is one more zero sum game that the redistributionistas.
Spreading around capital only ensures it is no longer treated as
interest earning principal, but as consumer cash. You only get growth
when those with a proven ability to invest wisely are allowed to do so
without restraint. You get even higher growth when the interest earned
by that investment is allowed to compound without tax.

Those who invest wisely and keep the rewards of that wisdom, spend that
money into the economy and thus redistribute it to those who are most productive.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list