> Dana wrote:
>  If you think that Keynes is about the government handing out money
> than say handing 22 billion to the insurance industry,

I'm not saying Keynes said that you are!  ^^^^^^ See ^^^^^^

You keep saying that the gov't is "handing" money to corporations. 
You just said it again.  Then you go on to say that, instead, the
gov't should give money to poor people or those who choose not to earn
more.

Well, the gov't doesn't make money, therefore it's not their's to give.

Let's look at minimum wage.  There the gov't is taking money that a
business has *earned* and forcing them to *give* it to a worker
despite the fact that, on the open market, the worker's choice would
be worth less.

Here's the problem: If the gov't takes money from earners and gives it
to those that choose not to earn, then everyone will choose not to
earn.  I've got a case study for you called Cuba.

Gel has pointed out how much higher the literacy rate is and how much
lower the crime and poverty rates are.  That's true.  But name the
last new medical innovation to come from Cuba.  How about their
alternative energy research?  Surely they've made strides in
technology?  No?  Oh.

Why not?  Because when the gov't takes from producers and gives it to
non-producers, the profit incentive moves from innovation to
dependancy.   That's why in Cuba you have people busting ass to be
bellman at the local American hotel - so they can have access to
American dollars.

Now, let me address your points about ENRON or Haliburton.  In a
nutshell, it's the same as above.  When the gov't takes money from
people who've earned it, say Caribou Coffee, and gives it to a
corporation that hasn't, say Haliburton, then they're encouraging
dependency.

SUMMARY
The question is not who should gov't give money to, it's who should
gov't be taking money from?  And the answer is nobody.  If you didn't
earn it, you don't deserve it, be you individual or corporation.

That's not to say that the gov't can't use tax dollars to give people
the *means* to earn (education).

>From what I can see you agree with me, you're just not taking the
final step and saying that all gov't reallocation of wealth is bad
given that all citizens have equal access to capital and education
which we do but didn't in Keynes' time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:194901
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to