Morality of Wealth Redistribution

[kaz]

Let's recap...

1. You said that government was inefficient because it is rife with "politics and favoritism".
2. I said that private businesses have those too

You are absolutely right on that. There are two major differences though:

1) The customer of a private corporation has the option to leave and go to their competitor if they are not served. The victim of government doesn't pay they go to jail.

2) The private company if it doesn't fix the problem goes under. Government raises taxes and screams they need more money even when they are running a $1.4 trillion deficit.

People are inefficient. The only way to hold them accountable is choice. Customers of private companies have it, victims of government don't. Inefficient management goes away, inefficient politicians don't. That is the difference.

 

[Vanquish]

Let's recap...

1. You said that government was inefficient because it is rife with "politics and favoritism".
2. I said that private businesses have those too

You are absolutely right on that. There are two major differences though:

1) The customer of a private corporation has the option to leave and go to their competitor if they are not served. The victim of government doesn't pay they go to jail.

2) The private company if it doesn't fix the problem goes under. Government raises taxes and screams they need more money even when they are running a $1.4 trillion deficit.

People are inefficient. The only way to hold them accountable is choice. Customers of private companies have it, victims of government don't. Inefficient management goes away, inefficient politicians don't. That is the difference.

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

 

[Foxfyre]

Let's recap...

1. You said that government was inefficient because it is rife with "politics and favoritism".
2. I said that private businesses have those too

You are absolutely right on that. There are two major differences though:

1) The customer of a private corporation has the option to leave and go to their competitor if they are not served. The victim of government doesn't pay they go to jail.

2) The private company if it doesn't fix the problem goes under. Government raises taxes and screams they need more money even when they are running a $1.4 trillion deficit.

People are inefficient. The only way to hold them accountable is choice. Customers of private companies have it, victims of government don't. Inefficient management goes away, inefficient politicians don't. That is the difference.

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

Customers however have EVERYTHING to do with the choices a company makes. When too many customers prefer somebody else's products or services or can't afford yours, you either adjust your products, prices, and policies to bring the customers back or you go out of business. But. . . .

If the government provides sufficient subsides, grants, and other perks so that you don't need the customers so much, the customers are screwed. As is the taxpayer.

A commerce and industry regulated to protect unalienable rights and then left alone to operate on free market principles will be far superior in quality, quanity, and affordability than will one micromanaged by the government. It will also produce far more sustainable gainful employment and prosperity than will anything done by the government.

 

[kaz]

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

You completely missed the point. Whether or not you change a company, you have the choice to walk across the street to their competitor. Congress has no competitor, it makes the rules we're all stuck with.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's recap...

1. You said that government was inefficient because it is rife with "politics and favoritism".
2. I said that private businesses have those too

You are absolutely right on that. There are two major differences though:

1) The customer of a private corporation has the option to leave and go to their competitor if they are not served. The victim of government doesn't pay they go to jail.

2) The private company if it doesn't fix the problem goes under. Government raises taxes and screams they need more money even when they are running a $1.4 trillion deficit.

People are inefficient. The only way to hold them accountable is choice. Customers of private companies have it, victims of government don't. Inefficient management goes away, inefficient politicians don't. That is the difference.

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company

If a private school is doing a poor job, I can pull my kids out and stop sending them my money.

If the Chicago Public Schools do a bad job, I don't have the choice of no longer sending in my property tax payment.

 

[Vanquish]

You are absolutely right on that. There are two major differences though:

1) The customer of a private corporation has the option to leave and go to their competitor if they are not served. The victim of government doesn't pay they go to jail.

2) The private company if it doesn't fix the problem goes under. Government raises taxes and screams they need more money even when they are running a $1.4 trillion deficit.

People are inefficient. The only way to hold them accountable is choice. Customers of private companies have it, victims of government don't. Inefficient management goes away, inefficient politicians don't. That is the difference.

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company

If a private school is doing a poor job, I can pull my kids out and stop sending them my money.

If the Chicago Public Schools do a bad job, I don't have the choice of no longer sending in my property tax payment.

Both of you have set up a false dichotomy.

No, you can't stop paying your taxes...but you DO get to vote out the bums who set the policies that fuck it up.

In your private school example, unless you're the ONLY fucking student, a few students isn't going to change much. And you both are relying on the power of the purse too much in your arguments.

You don't get to walk into the kitchen of a restaurant and tell some cook he's got to cut your cucumber long-ways. You don't get to go into a gas station and tell the attendant to start putting the cigarettes out by the gum. You don't get to walk in to the Big Lots warehouse and tell the warehouse manager you want all the pallet jacks to be electric from now on.

Those are just a few random examples of what customers DONT get to do. Private customers dont have nearly the control that y'all are making them out to have.

Are you both so oblivious to the fact that the VOTE is your control mechanism? Maybe that's what's wrong with this country.

 

[kaz]

Both of you have set up a false dichotomy.

No, you can't stop paying your taxes...but you DO get to vote out the bums who set the policies that fuck it up.

In your private school example, unless you're the ONLY fucking student, a few students isn't going to change much. And you both are relying on the power of the purse too much in your arguments.

But you can walk across the street to another private school

You don't get to walk into the kitchen of a restaurant and tell some cook he's got to cut your cucumber long-ways.

But you can walk across the street to another restaurant

You don't get to go into a gas station and tell the attendant to start putting the cigarettes out by the gum

But you do get to walk across the street to another gas station.

You don't get to walk in to the Big Lots warehouse and tell the warehouse manager you want all the pallet jacks to be electric from now on.

But you do get to walk across the street to another warehouse

Those are just a few random examples of what customers DONT get to do

But they do get to walk across the street to their competitors

Private customers dont have nearly the control that y'all are making them out to have.

What we both said was we have the ability to walk across the street to their competitors. You admitted we don't have that choice with politicians, we have to wait until their term is up then convince the majority of the population to "vote them out."

Are you both so oblivious to the fact that the VOTE is your control mechanism? Maybe that's what's wrong with this country.

Your way, I wait until their term is up, I get one vote which is added to everyone else's vote and I only get my way if I win.

My way, I walk across the street to a competitor of my choosing and time I want.

Yeah, it's the same.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wrong. I've already covered this point above. Scroll back. Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company. Sure, together a group of customers can have a financial impact (lowering/increasing profits, changes in product line based on demand/lack of demand, changing patterns of distribution/communication)...but ultimately its voting people in and out of governmental office that really makes an impact...and government is more accountable.

I don't disagree that Congress is overspending. So what do you do? You find a new candidate to replace the spending candidates. If you're not finding accountability in government, then one of the reasons is probably because you're not getting involved enough.

Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company

If a private school is doing a poor job, I can pull my kids out and stop sending them my money.

If the Chicago Public Schools do a bad job, I don't have the choice of no longer sending in my property tax payment.

Both of you have set up a false dichotomy.

No, you can't stop paying your taxes...but you DO get to vote out the bums who set the policies that fuck it up.

In your private school example, unless you're the ONLY fucking student, a few students isn't going to change much. And you both are relying on the power of the purse too much in your arguments.

You don't get to walk into the kitchen of a restaurant and tell some cook he's got to cut your cucumber long-ways. You don't get to go into a gas station and tell the attendant to start putting the cigarettes out by the gum. You don't get to walk in to the Big Lots warehouse and tell the warehouse manager you want all the pallet jacks to be electric from now on.

Those are just a few random examples of what customers DONT get to do. Private customers dont have nearly the control that y'all are making them out to have.

Are you both so oblivious to the fact that the VOTE is your control mechanism? Maybe that's what's wrong with this country.

I can stop spending at the private company immediately.

I could go my entire life, and beyond, and still not get a decent school system here in Chicago.

 

[Vanquish]

So you keep repeating the same simplistic bullshit over and over and over and over, Kaz. Yes, I get it. The power of the purse. Repeating the same drivel continuously don't mean you win. It just means you're thick-headed. Besides, I've already addressed that earlier.

Wait. Maybe that's it. You just don't READ what people post. You post your vomit based on what you expect someone to say. I mean hey, why actually ADVANCE the conversation. All that pesky reading is involved.

Yeah, you do have to wait a year, or two, or even four to vote. But those representatives are accountable 100% of the time they're in office. Once you vote them in, they're your bitch. Or you could treat them with respect until they do something you disapprove of, then work with organizations and other lawmakers to bring pressure, or propose changes. See, the vote is the control mechanism, but not the end of the power.

And with private business, they don't have to talk to you if they don't want to. You might not be a large enough customer to matter. Or they don't open their shop to even let you in. Your comparison is so flawed that it's ridiculous.

 

[Vanquish]

Customers rarely have any effect on the day-to-day operations of a company

If a private school is doing a poor job, I can pull my kids out and stop sending them my money.

If the Chicago Public Schools do a bad job, I don't have the choice of no longer sending in my property tax payment.

Both of you have set up a false dichotomy.

No, you can't stop paying your taxes...but you DO get to vote out the bums who set the policies that fuck it up.

In your private school example, unless you're the ONLY fucking student, a few students isn't going to change much. And you both are relying on the power of the purse too much in your arguments.

You don't get to walk into the kitchen of a restaurant and tell some cook he's got to cut your cucumber long-ways. You don't get to go into a gas station and tell the attendant to start putting the cigarettes out by the gum. You don't get to walk in to the Big Lots warehouse and tell the warehouse manager you want all the pallet jacks to be electric from now on.

Those are just a few random examples of what customers DONT get to do. Private customers dont have nearly the control that y'all are making them out to have.

Are you both so oblivious to the fact that the VOTE is your control mechanism? Maybe that's what's wrong with this country.

I can stop spending at the private company immediately.

I could go my entire life, and beyond, and still not get a decent school system here in Chicago.

If it's that important to you, then you should join an organization that's working to fix it. And a political party that can vote in the city, county, and state policies that need to change.

Spending only does so much. One customer or even 5 (depending on the industry) might make an immediate change and NOTHING happens. Sorry to tell you, the power of the purse isn't as powerful as the power of the VOTE.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Both of you have set up a false dichotomy.

No, you can't stop paying your taxes...but you DO get to vote out the bums who set the policies that fuck it up.

In your private school example, unless you're the ONLY fucking student, a few students isn't going to change much. And you both are relying on the power of the purse too much in your arguments.

You don't get to walk into the kitchen of a restaurant and tell some cook he's got to cut your cucumber long-ways. You don't get to go into a gas station and tell the attendant to start putting the cigarettes out by the gum. You don't get to walk in to the Big Lots warehouse and tell the warehouse manager you want all the pallet jacks to be electric from now on.

Those are just a few random examples of what customers DONT get to do. Private customers dont have nearly the control that y'all are making them out to have.

Are you both so oblivious to the fact that the VOTE is your control mechanism? Maybe that's what's wrong with this country.

I can stop spending at the private company immediately.

I could go my entire life, and beyond, and still not get a decent school system here in Chicago.

If it's that important to you, then you should join an organization that's working to fix it. And a political party that can vote in the city, county, and state policies that need to change.

Spending only does so much. One customer or even 5 (depending on the industry) might make an immediate change and NOTHING happens. Sorry to tell you, the power of the purse isn't as powerful as the power of the VOTE.

Voting only does so much. 100,000 voters or even 5,000,000 (depending on the election) might make an immediate change and NOTHING happens.

 

[Vanquish]

The same with "walking across the street." Maybe there's a change. Maybe there's not. You're not really showing that private business is more accountable.

Government = supposed to be accountable to the people no matter what.
Business = supposed to control itself, listens to people to the extent that must to stay afloat.

Now I'm sure you'll jump on the words "supposed to", but that's at least the starting blocks of the way the two work. One is NATURALLY designed, by your Founding Fathers, to be more beholden to the citizenry. Business can do whatever it wants, as long as it has enough money to survive.

 

[Stashman]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I'm not for wealth redistribution but I am for how the shouldn't get rich from taking money from me or other American citizens.

The wealthy should pay their fair share of taxes, and if we close the loops holes that allow them to pay less than maybe they would.

 

[kaz]

And with private business, they don't have to talk to you if they don't want to. You might not be a large enough customer to matter. Or they don't open their shop to even let you in. Your comparison is so flawed that it's ridiculous.

No, with private business they don't have to talk to you if they don't want to. The thing with free markets is they are free both ways. What you are free to do is...walk across the street to their competitor.

The only lack of freedom here is your choice when it's up to the politician. They don't have to talk to you and you don't have the choice to go anywhere. You seriously consider yourself "center?" Seriously?

 

[JakeStarkey]

There has been absolute immorality of wealth redistribution from the middle and working classes to the wealthy during the last 30 years.

 

[kaz]

Government = supposed to be accountable to the people no matter what

And how's that working out for you? $1.4 trillion deficits, unemployment almost 10%, almost no recovery from the last recession and we're heading into the next one, trillions in debt to China, housing prices in a five year slump. You think they are "supposed" to be accountable to you and continue to vote for them when they are clearly not.

 

[kaz]

Now I'm sure you'll jump on the words "supposed to"

Agreed, and rightly so. Clearly they are not.

 

[dblack]

I'm not for wealth redistribution but I am for how the shouldn't get rich from taking money from me or other American citizens.

The wealthy should pay their fair share of taxes, and if we close the loops holes that allow them to pay less than maybe they would.

That's the painful irony of it all, really. The usual line is that democracy will go under when the poor realize they can vote themselves a free lunch. But the way it's played out is a bit different. The poor may be able to vote, but the rich control the political process, and as long as we allow government to control who wins and loses in matters economic, the rich will prevail.

 

[Texanmike]

What's your opinion on the morality of taking money from those who earned it and giving it to people who haven't? Not talking about people who cannot earn their own money but rather those who choose not to. And can you recommend any books or writings on the subject?

Seems to me basic self worth is at least in part a reflection on your independence. Or at least contributing something, your own labor or time to your family or community. This country does not like freeloaders, and while there is a certain amount of leeway in tough times like we're in now, at some point opinions change.

So are we morally right to redistribute somebody else's wealth or deny people support in an effort to incentivize them to be more productive members of society?

I'm not for wealth redistribution but I am for how the shouldn't get rich from taking money from me or other American citizens.

The wealthy should pay their fair share of taxes, and if we close the loops holes that allow them to pay less than maybe they would.

Can you define what "fair share" means? Is it a percentage? Is it a dollar amount?

Mike

 

[Texanmike]

Government = supposed to be accountable to the people no matter what

And how's that working out for you? $1.4 trillion deficits, unemployment almost 10%, almost no recovery from the last recession and we're heading into the next one, trillions in debt to China, housing prices in a five year slump. You think they are "supposed" to be accountable to you and continue to vote for them when they are clearly not.

Part of that is due to the 17th amendment. When we removed accountability to the states we kind of screwed up.

Mike