Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Unjust Deserts - Gar Alperovitz & Lew Daly
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 53 (723379)
03-31-2014 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
03-31-2014 4:46 PM


The modern entrepreneur played no role in the development of the alphabet, the printing press, the adding machine, and most of the other technologies that form the backbone of his inventions and thus the wealth they bring. All the wealth attributable to these developments is unearned by himas, indeed, it is unearned by anyone living today. What then, other than injustice, entitles him to sole enjoyment of this wealth in the stead of millions of others who worked just as hard not earning it?
The ability to apply technology in a way that will successfully provide him with more wealth.
Its not entitlement. Its going out and doing what you need to do in order to obtain what you want.
the authors make it clear that most of what makes the man the man did not make.
But we're all in that boat. Some people do better in it than others. Not everyone has the same privileges and opportunities, though, as life is just not fair.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 03-31-2014 4:46 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Taq, posted 03-31-2014 7:30 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 6 by Jon, posted 04-01-2014 12:11 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 9 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 11:45 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 53 (723405)
04-01-2014 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Taq
03-31-2014 7:30 PM


The problem is that people are going out of their way to make it unfair.
Got an example?
While middle class families are paying around 30% income tax, the uber-rich are paying 10 to 15%.
According to the Congressional Budget Office:
quote:
The average federal tax rate for all households in 2010- that is, tax liabilities divided by income (including government transfer payments) before taxes-was 18.1 percent. To examine the effect of taxes on households with different amounts of income, CBO divided the nation's households into five groups of equal size, arrayed by before-tax income. In 2010, the federal tax rate for the bottom quintile of the income distribution was 1.5 percent and that for the top quintile was 24.0 percent (see Figure 1). The top 1 percent of all households in the United States had an average federal tax rate of 29.4 percent in 2010.
Higher-income households pay much more in federal taxes than do their lower-income counterparts: They have a much greater share of the nation's before-tax income, and they pay a much larger proportion of that income in taxes. Households in the top quintile (including the top percentile) paid 68.8 percent of all federal taxes, households in the middle quintile paid 9.1 percent, and those in the bottom quintile paid 0.4 percent of federal taxes.
Where did you get your numbers?
The rich also spend money on politicians...
Politics has always been about money. That's really the only thing it is about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Taq, posted 03-31-2014 7:30 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Taq, posted 04-01-2014 3:16 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 53 (723406)
04-01-2014 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jon
04-01-2014 12:11 AM


Knowing how to get rich is not the same as deserving to be rich.
Deserving? That's not even a factor that is in the equation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jon, posted 04-01-2014 12:11 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Jon, posted 04-02-2014 5:20 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 53 (723420)
04-01-2014 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by ringo
04-01-2014 11:45 AM


Catholic Scientist writes:
Its going out and doing what you need to do in order to obtain what you want.
Dillinger did that.
Sure, and he obtained some wealth. But since it was obtained illegally, the FBI hunted him down.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : syntax error

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 11:45 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:08 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 53 (723423)
04-01-2014 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by ringo
04-01-2014 12:08 PM


Isn't that what the OP is advocating? Making it illegal to steal more than your share?
I didn't see it. It says that since we all are riding on the coat tails of past invented technology, then people who have utilized that technology to obtain wealth don't really deserve it. I didn't see any mention of making anything illegal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:08 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:35 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 53 (723425)
04-01-2014 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by ringo
04-01-2014 12:35 PM


Notice the word "injustice"? Doesn't changing injustice to justice suggest changing the law?
I suppose it could. I didn't really read it that way, and they don't really offer any suggestions.
Its an injustice that some poor kid had to be born into a starving family in Africa while I get to sit here eating cheese and grapes.
Recognizing that as an injustice doesn't mean I'm suggesting that we make some law about it.
But I do see how you read it that way.
I'm just saying that Dillinger used technology for his own ends in the same way that entrepreneurs use technology for their own ends. The only difference is a legal technicality.
Yeah, I get that. That's how our world works. That's what I was saying; nobody is going to give you anything, regardless of what is deserved, you have to go out and get what you want.
If you want to do that illegally, then you may face the legal consequences. If you do it legally, you can obtain wealth and live your life.
But sitting around calling it an injustice and saying the people who have obtained wealth don't deserve it doesn't really accomplish anything.
If you want there to be changes, you have to go out and make changes. Us sitting around discussing how unfair life is, is a waste of time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:35 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 19 by Jon, posted 04-02-2014 3:15 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 53 (723443)
04-01-2014 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by ringo
04-01-2014 12:59 PM


That may be a philosophical injustice but the OP talks about entitlement, which is a more concrete legal injustice.
Heh, they were called "entitlement" programs because the recipients had been paying into them during their employment, so they were entitled to the benefits because they funded them.
Not so much today.
The intention of the OP (and the book) seems to be to increase awareness that the rich are not morally entitled to their riches even if they are legally entitled.
Considering that our lawmakers are controlled by the rich, I'm afraid you're on a fruitless endeavor.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by ringo, posted 04-01-2014 12:59 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by ringo, posted 04-02-2014 11:35 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024