Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Redistribution of wealth in its purest form is anything that takes my money and gives it to another person. This takes many forms, taxes, fees, gov't services etc.
I do not have a problem paying my fair share of taxes. That definition of fair is an equitable percentage that everyone pays. I think it is stupid to tax production. We should tax consumption much along the lines of the Fairtax.org plan.
When the Government says person X makes too much money or company Y makes too much money there is a very dangerous line that is being crossed. When the Government goes further and says that they think that those people and companies are making too much money and they are going to take it and then give it to those who don't have as much, that crosses another line.
Theres is a big difference between government taking money and then giving it out to those who it thinks deserves it and the Government taking the money to provide for highway projects, dams, a military etc. The difference is that Goverment is there to protect the people so that they can work hard and prosper.
What it means to the politicians and in particular to Obama is power. When politicians give people goodies they get elected and re-elected. The problem is the government is a parasite. It takes money and wealth and produces nothing. There will undoubtedly be arguments about military spending etc. But what does military spending do? I drains an economy unless you have the production capacity of other industries (See the former Soviet Union as an example). What happens when the government takes money and does nothing in return for those whom it has confiscated said funds? Those same individuals leave and incorporate offshore in countries that have much more friendly tax codes.
Getting back to my point though, the problem with redistribution of wealth is that it does nobody any good. All it does is create temporary power for an individual or party. To say that it does do good requires the reader to believe that the economy is a "Zero-sum" entity. That is that there is a fixed amount of "Assets" in the system and merely taking from some and giving it to others will not hurt anyone as there is the same amount of "assets" in the system. As everyone knows that is not how the economy works.
What happens is that when you take from one who works and earns what was taken that person looks for other outlets by which to protect their wealth. So let's look at a hypothetical that has the possibility of being all to real. Oil Company's and their profits. What happens when you take a company's profits? They look to hide the profits or put them out of reach. What happens when ExxonMobil gets hammered by congress? They start doing business with other countries that are more friendly like India or China. Russia even understands this. They have given massive tax breaks for oil companies who perform exploration. So where do a lot of companies choose to go work right now? Russia.
At this point Russia is more capitalistic than our own country and China is headed that way.
For those who would say that capitalism and it priciples are out moded (Read this months issue of Fortune) I would say show me an economy that is socialistic in nature that has ever surpassed ours. And yes, creating wealth is good. The simple fact that there are people who are at the lower end of the economic scale does not mean capitalism is bad. When socialism is the order of the day, everyone is at the bottom end of the economic scale, again example of the former Soviet Union.
Who's John Galt.
"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2
If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu