Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Wealth Redistribution and a Moral Imperative

Baraka_Guru · 10-16-2008, 04:00 AM

grolsch, thanks for the comments.

You've pointed out the challenge of this thread: There is no one right way to manage wealth, whether personally or through government. More importantly, you've pointed out that extreme viewpoints are dangerous, though some believe that collecting taxes in any capacity is a form of extremism. And then we look at how those taxes are spent.

What's been greatly missing out of the conversation is the moral side of things, which smooth has just pointed out. It's tough to relate the two because it's pointless to try to determine the motives of government policy. What we should measure, however, is the moral imperative of the society at large. Do people want to fight poverty? Do people want the sick out in the streets? Do we want people to have to work their fingers to the bone and still not have enough to live comfortably? Do we want access to education left only to the wealthy?

We then move on to ask: What do we do about it?

Some would say nothing. Others would say whatever we reasonably can. I'm inclined to say the latter. This is because I'm concerned with social cohesion. I want the society I live in to thrive. I don't want economic disparity to tear it apart at the seams.

And I'm willing to pay for it.

I think it's limiting to only look at the worst of society and make judgements based on that. Looking only at the welfare "free riders," the "irresponsible young mothers," etc., only to determine that socialism is bad is an erroneous view. This is because it overlooks everything else socialism has done to make societies better. The inverse would be to say capitalism is bad because it damages the environment and enslaves children in Asia. This too overlooks the good things that can come about within a system. The key is to work with the system to improve it. To let it run on its own as though it were one of God's creations would lead it to its own destruction.

10-16-2008, 04:00 AM	#63 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	grolsch, thanks for the comments. You've pointed out the challenge of this thread: There is no one right way to manage wealth, whether personally or through government. More importantly, you've pointed out that extreme viewpoints are dangerous, though some believe that collecting taxes in any capacity is a form of extremism. And then we look at how those taxes are spent. What's been greatly missing out of the conversation is the moral side of things, which smooth has just pointed out. It's tough to relate the two because it's pointless to try to determine the motives of government policy. What we should measure, however, is the moral imperative of the society at large. Do people want to fight poverty? Do people want the sick out in the streets? Do we want people to have to work their fingers to the bone and still not have enough to live comfortably? Do we want access to education left only to the wealthy? We then move on to ask: What do we do about it? Some would say nothing. Others would say whatever we reasonably can. I'm inclined to say the latter. This is because I'm concerned with social cohesion. I want the society I live in to thrive. I don't want economic disparity to tear it apart at the seams. And I'm willing to pay for it. I think it's limiting to only look at the worst of society and make judgements based on that. Looking only at the welfare "free riders," the "irresponsible young mothers," etc., only to determine that socialism is bad is an erroneous view. This is because it overlooks everything else socialism has done to make societies better. The inverse would be to say capitalism is bad because it damages the environment and enslaves children in Asia. This too overlooks the good things that can come about within a system. The key is to work with the system to improve it. To let it run on its own as though it were one of God's creations would lead it to its own destruction. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 10-16-2008 at 04:13 AM..