On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Harry Pollard replied:
> Why should they object? My father contributed to society $50 million worth
> of worthwhile things and got back $50 million.Seems to me the account is
> closed. The $50 million was his to do with what he wishes.
...
> My father had to work for 60 years to contribute enough to the
> starving people for him to get his $50 million in payment.
What was his work that you say was worth $50 million ? Was it really his
work or rather that of his employees ? How did his work "contribute to the
starving people" ?
$50 million in 60 years means a wage of $420 per hour, *every* working hour
in those 60 years. It seems unlikely that a person can actually generate
*value* in that order of magnitude. Hence there must be exploitation of
others (employees, partners, customers) involved.
And since this was what was "left over", and he certainly had to spend some
money for living during those 60 years, his actual "wage" must have been even
higher than $420, i.e. yet more exploitation.
> I'm glad he gave it to me.
In other words, you are against equal opportunities...
> Of course, not paying people for the job they do is a good way to for an
> economy to fail - rather as did the soviet's. Although they had enough
> sense to provide all kinds of special perks for their ballet dancers, and
> musicians, and etc.
It seems that Americans aren't being paid enough either, or why do they
have to work so many hours ?
> >So you think it's okay that many people don't get a fair education due
> >to lack of money ? In another post, you said you are *in favor* of
> >equal opportunities !?
>
> I thought that "education" wasn't a matter of choice, but that it was
> compulsory. That's whether you had money or not.
It seems that U$ public schools can't seriously be called "education".
(not to mention the many drop-outs)
> I'm in favor of justice. With all respect, Chris, you seem to be in favor
> of charity - for example, giving money to poor people.
The point is not charity, but equal chances (starting conditions).
Charity is just a 'band-aid' therapy for an injust system -- the goal must
be prevention of inequality, not a half-assed therapy of it.
> > > But mostly I dislike examples of government mis-control being cited as
> > > evidence of the failure of the free market.
> >
> >If you take gov't control away, the failure becomes even more abysmal.
> >Btw, if you get mugged, I bet you'll be the first to cry out for the cops.
> >Aren't cops a form of government control ?
>
> How will the cops help me if I've been mugged? The statistics for catching
> crooks are poor. The figures for getting convictions from those they do
> catch are equally bad.The chances of reforming those convicted are abysmal.
>
> But, policing, like fire-fighting, is a service. Do you think that these
> services might be cheaper and more efficient if they were run by the market
> and not bureaucrats?
Sounds like you want to privatize the cops too. This would mean even worse
"service", as we've seen e.g. with the privatization of postal service in
Switzerland.
> Would you like the government to run your local supermarket?
It should be run by locals, not by a central gov't and not by Walmart.
> The present California electricity problems is a beautiful example of
> government not knowing what it's doing.
I thought the deregulation bill at the root of this crisis was drafted by
the California utilities themselves and pushed thru by their own lobbyists.
> There had been no new electrical utilities built in California for more
> than ten years - even though demand in the burgeoning Golden State had
> increased by 20%. The Greens and their idiot allies had effectively fought
> the sensible building of more plant.
>
> Although some Greens have come to the conclusion that nuclear power is
> better because nukes don't emit that terribly noxious gas, CO2 - the
> California landscape that should have been dotted with nuclear plants, isn't.
The solution isn't nuclear (the most expensive energy!) but renewables
(wind and solar) -- amply supported by the Greens. Solar power can be
installed decentrally on roofs etc., making people independent from
centralized price-gauging and power shortages.
I have read that the (public-owned!) utilities which supply Los Angeles and
Sacramento happen to be prospering in the midst of this crisis, i.a. because
they are using renewable energies.
> Goverment generally doesn't do a terribly good job - even in the areas
> which naturally are their responsibility (where the market doesn't work)..
At least you admit that the market doesn't work in some areas.
(Where *does* it work, btw?)
> The political system rests on a financial foundation of contributions from
> the FatCats (those who get income from privileges given them by the
> politicians).
Because the political system is privatized to a pretty high extent already.
> End the privileges.
Yup, end the privilege of inheriting money and influence. That was my point
in my earlier message of this thread.
Chris
