you have a community, everyone working, everyone comfortable, happy, friendly, a closeknit or undivided community - then you take most wealth off most ppl & give it to one - everyone much unhappier - the many because theyve been robbed & deprived, the one bc everybody hates him, he is isolated from the community, he has to try to protect himself all the time, the extra wealth is merely more than he can use [fairpay satisfied nearly all desires, leaving very little for overwealth to do for him] - EVERYONE MUCH UNHAPPIER - therefore, reversing that change: EVERYONE MUCH HAPPIER
EVERYONE much happier
everyone MUCH HAPPIER
everyone already agrees
who is going to argue that taking 90% off 90% etc is going to make the community better off, happier, more peaceful, more closeknit, less divided?
NO ONE
thrfr there is already a universal unanimous human will to make this change [in the sensible part of the brain]
we just have to catalyse the change with a little talking
2006-10-17 19:49:59 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
What in heavens name are you talking about?
2006-10-17 20:01:31 · answer #1 · answered by expatriot1000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there isn't any considerable argument which would be made to help that suggestion. additionally, "freemarket capitalism" and "limited fortunes" are contradictory words. additionally, you mean that there become a while whilst freemarket capitalism, democracy, peace, liberty & justice for all exisited to a much better degree than they do now. whilst become that? And have been fortunes "justly limited" at that ingredient greater suitable than they are actually? additionally, many here could be nicely served to tell apart between the introduction of wealth and the distribution of wealth. To posit that wealth isn't created, yet is in simple terms moved from one guy or woman to a distinctive, is as igorant an financial concept as i can conceive. evaluate our existence to the lives of human beings 50, one hundred, or a million,000 years in the past and you're able to desire to on the instant comprehend how ridiculous that concept is.
2016-11-23 17:12:09 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what on earth are you rambling on about? You're making little sense and as much as I can get of it, you don't have any facts to back this up with.
2006-10-17 20:07:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you see you want to be on a blogger site not a question and answer forum.thats what blogs are for,to stand on your soap box and spout out your little diatribe
2006-10-17 20:02:10 · answer #4 · answered by seth s 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋