is it the same thing as arguing: criminals will figure out a way round the law, so no point in having a law?
when ppl were discussing whether or not to have a law against murder [long ago], did someone argue: murderers will figure a way around it, so there is no point in making it illegal?
can ppl figure a way round lf? will it be difficult to hide having an overfortune, ie money belonging to others, earnings of others? will it make it possible for the police to investigate, pursue, prosecute more thieves?
[profiteering used to be a bad thing - you never hear that word any more - did the superrich suppress it? - have the superrich/superpowerful been 'marketing' [propaganda-ing] theft, profiteering under the name greed? - does superwealth attract the most evil/ destructive/ foolish/ heartless/ murderous/ hitlerous? - does flypaper catch flies? - are ppl vulnerable to promotion of greed as a virtue, ie benefit, good?]
[do ppl project their relative decency on to their
2006-10-21 09:37:55 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
Are you still on your communist kick?
You are confused. The prospect of wealth through hard work, innovation and creativity is the cornerstone of human existence.
Restrict that upper level of wealth potential and we will be reduced to the fate of the USSR.
2006-10-23 05:46:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with the principle here. The mere fact that people will figure a way round it is not a good reason to not have a law against something. You have a fence along the southern border of the States against immigrants don't you? Just because some folks cut holes in or climb over or under the fence doesn't mean you take down the fence, right?
2006-10-24 08:42:58 · answer #2 · answered by MBK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋