how good is your dispassion, your objectivity, your comprehension? [logic test]?

Question

how deeply [sincerely, seriously, maturely, unsillily] can you reply to this logic?

premise 1: if a govt took 90% of income & fortune off 90% of the population & gave it to 1%, everyone would say that would increase violence & problems, and decrease happiness, enormously

therefore: everyone will say that a govt stopping doing that [reversing that policy] would increase happiness & decrease violence & problems enormously

2. the human world has worse range of inequality than this: 90% get 10% to 0.1% of world average pay/hour - 9% get 100% to 10% of world av pay/hr - 1% get world av to MILLION times world av pay/hr

therefore everyone agrees that reversing that situation will increase happiness and decrease violence enormously

everyone wants happiness [peace safety etc]

therefore there is a universal human will to reverse the present extremely inequitous, violent and unhappy situation

therefore it will happen

Answer 1

Okay, first let me say I get where you're going. But how you get there is disjointed "crazy talk". What's your question, man?! We get the atrocity. We see the "dis" logic of current realities. You got any suggestions or just frenetic, rhetorical observations...

Answer 2

There is a big difference between the government giving 90% of the wealth to 10% of the population, and the market doing it.

A market economy encourages production, whereas government merely redistributes what has already been produced.

I'm not saying a certain amount of redistribution wouldn't be a good thing. I do believe a safety net of some kind is necessary. However, if the government took it upon itself to ensure that everyone had exactly the same amount, I believe we would all starve.

Answer 3

comments

for premise 1 . . what about the other 9 percent . .? wouldn't it be better to say 90 percent of the income from 90 percent of the people and gave it to 10 percent (rather than 1 percent).

also, are you assuming that everyone starts equal? or are you taking it from people as they are now?

premise 1 needs to be clarified . . .

premise 2 .. is a little confusing in the arrangement of the categories.

basically, the issue of wealth disparity is a great issue and there should be some way to work on it .. .

Answer 4

Reagan crushed Communisim long ago-try again By outspending them ,it might work on paper but the human EGO is too powerful,keeping up with the jones is not only in america but even nations covet each others stuff.

Answer 5

Logically fallacious in several spots.

everyone wants happiness [peace safety etc]

I will give you that everyone wants these things, but not necessarily for anyone but themself.
So regardless of universal human will, there won't necessarily be a collective force to diffuse these things for everyone.

Answer 6

People don't understand how raped they are when they work.

I'll do anything in my power to keep myself from working; the disparity in quality of life is enormous.

Answer 7

was that a question or statement? oooooh. well not very..

this theory seems to work it self out..though stangley mass enlightment would be the cause not the effect...odd

Answer 8

Some of the happiest people in history were poor. I do not agree with this.