Quote:
Originally posted by Shades
Look, that's plain ridiculous. You're basically saying that the rich owe that money to the poor, and if they don't pay up, they should be turned on/assaulted/killed and have all of their assets taken. How can you possibly justify that? I just as well turn this on its head:
The rich are the entrepreneurs, investors, and creators of all of the poor's products. The rich in essence make possible and provide the assets of the poor. In turn, the poor work for the rich, at least enough that the rich don't throw the poor into work camps and withhold their assets. The poor should be happy to only pay less than 15% of their income; they get to keep the other 85+% to use as they choose, unlike the rich, and no institutionalized slavery occurs.
Wow, that sounded really intelligent. Thanks for playing.
...
|
I would agree that you are right, except the rich are in the overwhelming minority and would lose an all-out class war, badly. I didn't say that the situation I described was morally correct; however, the situation is realistic. If the rich don't provide for some social welfare, bloody revolutions will occur. I have history as a MAJOR factor in favor of my position, what do you have ?
__________________
I'm leaving for the University of California: Santa Barbara in 5 hours, give me your best college advice - things I need, good ideas, bad ideas, nooky, ect.
Originally Posted by Norseman on another forum:
"Yeah, the problem with the world is the stupid people are all cocksure of themselves and the intellectuals are full of doubt."
|