America in Debt - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tarl Cabot · 11-14-2004, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

Because all things are not equal.

Who is entitled to decide which ones should not be given the fruits of the "labor" of others?

You?

That's a very awkward dodge of a question you apparently would like very much not to answer. But I'll not do likewise.

Yes, I'm entitled to decide who is given the fruits of MY labor. It's called charitable giving.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

I wouldn't ever deny that there are people who abuse the social provisions of our society. I most certainly deny that no one should receive those social provisions. And I most certainly deny that no one should receive those social provisions because some people abuse them. Maybe if you can invent a device which can accurately determine who is an abuser and who is not, we can cut down costs. Until then, the simple fact remains that rich does not mean worthy and poor does not mean unworthy, and the poor who are worthy are not being altruistic by remaining poor, they just do not have access to the opportunities afforded to others.

I have no idea where you came up with your "worthy" and "unworthy" comparisons.

You're free to donate as much money as you like to anyone who arouses your mother instinct. The rest of us should be free to donate money as we see fit.

You seem to be mistaking equal opportunity for "guaranteed equal outcome."

Manx · 11-14-2004, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarl Cabot

That's a very awkward dodge of a question you apparently would like very much not to answer. But I'll not do likewise.

Yes, I'm entitled to decide who is given the fruits of MY labor. It's called charitable giving.

Sorry, that's not how society functions. It's a group effort. You don't get to make all the decisions.

Quote:

You seem to be mistaking equal opportunity for "guaranteed equal outcome."

Not in the slightest. There is no such thing as equal opportunity. I couldn't care less about "guaranteed equal outcome".

smooth · 11-14-2004, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarl Cabot

You appear to have it backwards, unless you are claiming that the top decile of our economy is the recipient of over 90% of tax receipts.

I for one do not believe that the top decile of taxpayers uses 90% of the roads, water, electricity, government-funded medical care, public schools, public transportation, clean air, military and fire protection, police, food stamps, or housing assistance, to name a few.

Nope. $8 less. The other nine are still eating, and as I demonstrated, if anything, they "eat" more than the "greedy rich guy."

Sounds like he's behaving like the first four men, except that they provided nothing.

I can't control how you believe, but I can demonstrate that your belief on this matter is incorrect.

The top percentile, owners of capital, directly and indirectly benefit from all the things you listed more than anyone else in this society. You have a distorted view of distribution of labor and how capital works if you are going to claim that workers driving on the freeways "use" and benefit the road system more than the owners of the means of production.

One example will make this clear: when a trucker drives on the freeway, the person making profit from what is being transported is benefitting from the use of the roadway, not the trucker. Sure, he makes his wage, but only commensurate with his labor (a Marxist would argue that wages aren't even commensurate with his labor, but I'm not being an apologist for communism or Marxism in this response).

Basically, all of those services you listed are essential for our economy to run. "Use" of those services benefits the people who reap the rewards of the economic system in place. We simply need to follow the money to determine who benefits the most. A discussion over justness is suitable, but not necessary to understand that the people who reap the greatest rewards of our society and own the material resources that garner them those benefits are responsible for its upkeep. Contrary to popular belief about our citizens' individuality, the truth of the matter is the upkeep of citizens and our society's infrastructure should be understood as part of the overhead capitalists need to pay to continue reaping their benefits. The most savvy capitalists understand this--which is why one finds such incredible amounts of money infused into social services by the wealthiest individuals.

In fact, I haven't spoken to anyone who disputes that what the social services enacted after the depression saved capitalism. The system was imploding. If you want to look at the historical record, for example, communism/socialism/wobblies/unions were an extremely powerful force during that era.