How much is too much?

[dgs49]

Any discussion of taxation in the U.S. has to recognize that most middle class people pay significant taxes to FIVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, namely Federal, State, County, Municipality, and School District.

To anyone not wearing blinders, the expression "gay mafia" is not the least bit controversial.

[Scooter]

Correct. It's not the least bit controversial because anyone using it is universally recognized as being an idiot. It's on the same level as talking about the extraterrestrials being held in Area 51.

Unless you can identify some sort of gay organized crime syndicate that puts out contracts on the lives of its enemies.










Didn't think so.

[Econoline]

Not unless those at the top are truly stealing from those at the bottom, which is clearly not the case now.

Need I point that there are all sorts of opinions on what constitutes "stealing" on the macroeconomic level? There are still extreme lefties around spouting the old "All property is theft" line; and then there is the philosophy (often attributed to 19th century railroad tycoon Collis Huntington), “Whatever is not nailed down is mine; whatever can be pried loose is not nailed down.” (Just recently in the news we have seen a crazy old bigot and his hundreds of armed supporters who apparently think there's nothing wrong with just taking the raw material that goes into the product he sells from the U.S. taxpayer. Those who do this on a larger scale are usually a bit more discreet about it, nowadays.)

The fortunate or unfortunate fact is that today's technology makes it possible for enterprising folks to amass incredible fortunes without actually producing anything. But realistically speaking, this has been going on forever anyway.

The word "worse" presumes that it is "bad," which has not been established. But I think it is reasonably well established that the economic baseline (people at the bottom) are at the same level in perpetuity (which is not to say that THOSE INDIVIDUALS remain at the bottom, but only that those who happen to be at the bottom today remain at the same low level in perpetuity, adjusted for inflation). And since those at the top (same qualifiers) become wealthier over time, it is a mathematical certainty that "inequality" increases over time. But so what?

First of all it's by no means "established" that the current situation is stable even in respect to the last half-century. And we can see in other places (in the world today) and other times (in history) what oligarchies look like, and what greater or lesser levels of economic inequality look like...so it's reasonable to question which direction we're headed, whether that's good or bad, and, if it's something that will be worse for most people, whether we can do anything to change that.

If nothing else, we've seen that sometimes extreme conditions lead to armed unrest and vast social disruptions, so we should have some idea how far things can go, and how to reverse them, before that happens. Especially since there is now a half-trillion dollar worldwide industry devoted to making people want what they haven't got.

[Econoline]

https://twitter.com/Pontifex/status/460 ... 80928.html