--- Jacob W Braestrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "'John Hull wrote:...' Assuming you are not just joking, this implies that things such as "ability to atract mates" should be taken into account when redistributing income today."
Mostly joking. I was more concerned with the idea that forcing marriage on people was the only way to level the playing field for mates. It does seem that fincanial security & luxury goods really can "sweeten the deal," at least for some people. That's not to say that such a program would be practical. However, ugly people do get shafted in life. If that could be reasonably accounted for as a component in a redistribution scheme that met the approval of the polity, then I probably wouldn't oppose it. "...it would be unfair to take money from a rich, ugly man (or woman)..." They'd just pay less in taxes than a rich, beautiful person. -jsh __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
