Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-05 Thread Craig
On 03/04/2013 02:36 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
 See also:

 Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/

 This is the root of the problem.

 - Jed


The Left keeps passing taxes which only apply to the poor.

Obama's health care law was recently passed. It will tax the low and
middle class about $2000 per family when it goes into effect. This tax
won't affect the rich.

Then there's medicare and social security. These add up to a 15% tax on
the low and middle class. They don't apply on income over $100K. These
taxes don't affect the rich.

We have a regressive tax system in this country, and it just keeps
getting worse with every new tax passed. I've worked my way up through
this whole spectrum. Until I started making more than $100K, it felt
like every time I was given a raise, it was taken away from me. It is
quite discouraging, and is depressing society.

The solution is to stop taking money from people against their will,
using threats of violence. The idea that we can improve society if only
we can threaten enough people, and take enough money from them, is
preposterous.

Craig



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-05 Thread Terry Blanton
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:

 The solution is to stop taking money from people against their will,
 using threats of violence. The idea that we can improve society if only
 we can threaten enough people, and take enough money from them, is
 preposterous.

With the purchase of 2700 light tanks and millions of rounds of
ammunition, it looks to me like the HSA is planning just the opposite
of your recommendation:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/03/homeland-security-has-purchased-2700.html

I guess that, instead of assault weapons, we need to be stocking up on RPGs.



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-05 Thread Terry Blanton
More of the same:

http://www.silverdoctors.com/obama-begins-push-to-confiscate-iras-401ks/

If they do this, they will need the 2700 light tanks.



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-05 Thread Eric Walker
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:

The solution is to stop taking money from people against their will,
 using threats of violence. The idea that we can improve society if only
 we can threaten enough people, and take enough money from them, is
 preposterous.


I cannot think of a more effective way to widen the gap between haves and
have-nots than to repeal existing taxes.  I appreciate the differing
opinions on this list -- it's one of the few places where there's a genuine
dialog on these topics that goes beyond sound-bites.  But it is hard for me
to see how there would be an occasion for confusion on this point.

Eric


[Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Jouni Valkonen
This is nicely done short video that illustrates quite well what people would 
like from the society. I would recommend to use two minutes on it, because it 
is interesting on sociological point of view.

Viral Video Shows the Extent of U.S. Wealth Inequality
http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/

—Jouni

Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Jed Rothwell
That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
political campaigns.

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Peter Gluck
Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism, it
is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot change
the situation much.
Peter

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


RE: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Jones Beene
Excellent neologism, Peter.

 

This one will stick. I am always amazed at your creative instincts wrt the
English language. Moneytheism, indeed!

 

This alter-logo capability is reminiscent of Miguel Cervantes, who as a
non-native speaker contributed more to this language at a certain level,
than did Shakespeare. Forewarned is forearmed; to be prepared is half the
victory. MdC

 

 

 

From: Peter Gluck 

 

Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism, it
is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
applied to power

 



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread James Bowery
Peter, to be polite, your view is irrationally anti-civilization.  It is so
irrational that it gives a bad name to anarchists.

You are irrational because you cannot seem to grasp that degrees of
inequality -- degrees graphically illustrated in that video for those
otherwise ignorant of the actual numbers (such as yourself) -- those
degrees matter as a symptom of an underlying disease in society if not the
disease itself.

Look, its simple:

Civilization enables accumulation of property beyond the homestead -- the
accumulation of what might be called artificial property.  Artificial
property rights are therefore the proper tax base.  Basing your taxes on
economic activity is crazy and leads to run-away centralization of wealth.
 It is an obvious failure mode of civilization as the wealthy are prone to
institutional capture in order to shift the tax base from wealth to
economic activity.

I laid all this out, including macroeconomic as well as microeconomic
aspects in a white paper over 2 decades ago but the current short story is
as follows:

Tax the liquid value of artificial property rights at the risk free
interest rate of modern portfolio theory.  Establish liquid value via
escrowed bids.  The high escrowed bid for a property right receives
interest at the risk free interest rate.  Other bids do not.

This gets rid of what might be called private sector economic rent as a
corrupting influence on civilization.

However, it leaves public sector rent seeking as a moral hazard.  This is
best dealt with by distributing revenues as a citizen's dividend -- equally
to all citizens -- and requiring national defense to be decentralized as it
is with the Swiss.




On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism, it
 is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot change
 the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Paul Breed
The only thing shown to reduce income disparity is a freer market, yet that
is the one thing not currently discussed.


On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism, it
 is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot change
 the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread David Roberson
I think that much of the money held by the 1% crowd was obtained by legal 
monopolies.   It is a shame that the regulators have not prevented this from 
occurring, but instead have encouraged it.  True competition would prevent this 
from happening in most cases since the profits are substantial for those 
participating, and the various laws should be adjusted to break up such 
concentrations of power.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Mar 4, 2013 11:16 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.


The only thing shown to reduce income disparity is a freer market, yet that is 
the one thing not currently discussed.



On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism, it is 
applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already applied to 
power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read please the 
chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan by N.N. Taleb  a 
great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot change the 
situation much.
Peter



On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for 
decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in Time 
magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not considered 
politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during political 
campaigns.


- Jed








-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com



 


Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread James Bowery
My proposed tax system does just that through the liquid value estimation.
 Monopolies are basically no brainer asset valuations and if an asset's
value is basically no brainer then its profit stream will be distributed
to all citizens equally in the citizen's dividend.  This works even for
non-legislated monopolies such as Bill Gates' asset value in MS-DOS once
IBM had made it the defacto industry standard birtually forcing everyone to
pay a tax to Gates in order to benefit from industry standardization.

Its terribly tragic people won't listen to me about this.  It really is.

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:34 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 I think that much of the money held by the 1% crowd was obtained by legal
 monopolies.   It is a shame that the regulators have not prevented this
 from occurring, but instead have encouraged it.  True competition would
 prevent this from happening in most cases since the profits are substantial
 for those participating, and the various laws should be adjusted to break
 up such concentrations of power.

  Dave



 -Original Message-
 From: Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Mon, Mar 4, 2013 11:16 am
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

  The only thing shown to reduce income disparity is a freer market, yet
 that is the one thing not currently discussed.


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

  - Jed




  --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Peter Gluck
Dear James,

I will not discuss here about subjects that are not related to LENR.
Actually you are not speaking about my opinion, inequality is a fact both
in Nature and in societies, I am not ignorant about any actual numbers or
the Gini coefficients worldwide. You are over-complicating the facts,
inequality goes beyond taxes and even political regimes. What a dredful
inequality is in North Korea! The dictator is  a god, many people die of
hunger etc and from inside nothing can be changed.
By the way, when I have worked in journalism (2002-2010) I could follow the
steady increase of inequality worldwide on the Web and in practice in my
country, It is a very powerful process. I remember using the following
quote for one of my writings about Inequality:

“*Nature* is unfair? So much the better, inequality is the only bearable
thing, the monotony of equality can only lead us to boredom”. *Francis
Picabia quote*

Nature's main aim is interestingness.

I will continue this discussion only in private, Vortex has to be focused
on LENR, it was almost destroyed by a Troll.
Peter

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 6:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Peter, to be polite, your view is irrationally anti-civilization.  It is
 so irrational that it gives a bad name to anarchists.

 You are irrational because you cannot seem to grasp that degrees of
 inequality -- degrees graphically illustrated in that video for those
 otherwise ignorant of the actual numbers (such as yourself) -- those
 degrees matter as a symptom of an underlying disease in society if not the
 disease itself.

 Look, its simple:

 Civilization enables accumulation of property beyond the homestead -- the
 accumulation of what might be called artificial property.  Artificial
 property rights are therefore the proper tax base.  Basing your taxes on
 economic activity is crazy and leads to run-away centralization of wealth.
  It is an obvious failure mode of civilization as the wealthy are prone to
 institutional capture in order to shift the tax base from wealth to
 economic activity.

 I laid all this out, including macroeconomic as well as microeconomic
 aspects in a white paper over 2 decades ago but the current short story is
 as follows:

 Tax the liquid value of artificial property rights at the risk free
 interest rate of modern portfolio theory.  Establish liquid value via
 escrowed bids.  The high escrowed bid for a property right receives
 interest at the risk free interest rate.  Other bids do not.

 This gets rid of what might be called private sector economic rent as a
 corrupting influence on civilization.

 However, it leaves public sector rent seeking as a moral hazard.  This is
 best dealt with by distributing revenues as a citizen's dividend -- equally
 to all citizens -- and requiring national defense to be decentralized as it
 is with the Swiss.




 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Harry Veeder
James you need to find people who will listen.

Look at the Basic Income Earth Network if you haven't already heard of
the organization.
http://www.basicincome.org/bien/
How to fund a basic income is a serious topic in places where the
movement is more advanced such as Europe, Brazil
and Nambia and South Africa.

Also check out the Journal of Basic Income studies:

Basic Income Studies is an international and interdisciplinary
peer-reviewed journal devoted to basic income and related issues of
poverty relief and universal welfare. An exciting venture supported by
major international networks of scholars, policy makers, and
activists, Basic Income Studies is the only forum for scholarly
research on this leading edge movement in contemporary social policy.

Articles discuss the design and implementation of basic income
schemes, and address the theory and practice of universal welfare in
clear, non-technical language that engages the wider policy community.
Past authors include Philippe Van Parijs, Claus Offe, Joel Handler,
Erik Olin Wright, Philip Pettit, Carole Pateman and many more.

BIS is published by The Berkeley Electronic Press, and from 2008
onwards publishes three issues per year, including a special themed
issue in December. Recent themed issues discussed the relation between
basic income and republicanism and feminist perspectives on basic
income.

You can download articles and research notes published in BIS *for
free* via the Bepress guest access policy. Please visit the journal at
http://www.bepress.com/bis, click the link of the article you want to
view, and follow the instructions.

harry

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
 My proposed tax system does just that through the liquid value estimation.
 Monopolies are basically no brainer asset valuations and if an asset's
 value is basically no brainer then its profit stream will be distributed
 to all citizens equally in the citizen's dividend.  This works even for
 non-legislated monopolies such as Bill Gates' asset value in MS-DOS once IBM
 had made it the defacto industry standard birtually forcing everyone to pay
 a tax to Gates in order to benefit from industry standardization.

 Its terribly tragic people won't listen to me about this.  It really is.

 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:34 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 I think that much of the money held by the 1% crowd was obtained by legal
 monopolies.   It is a shame that the regulators have not prevented this from
 occurring, but instead have encouraged it.  True competition would prevent
 this from happening in most cases since the profits are substantial for
 those participating, and the various laws should be adjusted to break up
 such concentrations of power.

 Dave



 -Original Message-
 From: Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Mon, Mar 4, 2013 11:16 am
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

 The only thing shown to reduce income disparity is a freer market, yet
 that is the one thing not currently discussed.


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan by
 N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com






Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread James Bowery
To be clear, when I say irrational I mean it literally in the sense of
Greek philosophy's emphasis on ratio:

If you can't take a number out of context -- that is to say, a number
without respect to another number which may provide a ratio.  To attempt to
do so is irRATIOnal.

Yes inequality of wealth will always be with us.

To read people talking about comparative degrees of inequality is to deny
their RATIOnality.

In your mind there are two positions to the discourse:  equality and
inequality.  This is quite clearly irrational.


On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear James,

 I will not discuss here about subjects that are not related to LENR.
 Actually you are not speaking about my opinion, inequality is a fact both
 in Nature and in societies, I am not ignorant about any actual numbers or
 the Gini coefficients worldwide. You are over-complicating the facts,
 inequality goes beyond taxes and even political regimes. What a dredful
 inequality is in North Korea! The dictator is  a god, many people die of
 hunger etc and from inside nothing can be changed.
 By the way, when I have worked in journalism (2002-2010) I could follow
 the steady increase of inequality worldwide on the Web and in practice in
 my country, It is a very powerful process. I remember using the following
 quote for one of my writings about Inequality:

 “*Nature* is unfair? So much the better, inequality is the only bearable
 thing, the monotony of equality can only lead us to boredom”. *Francis
 Picabia quote*

 Nature's main aim is interestingness.

 I will continue this discussion only in private, Vortex has to be focused
 on LENR, it was almost destroyed by a Troll.
 Peter

 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 6:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Peter, to be polite, your view is irrationally anti-civilization.  It is
 so irrational that it gives a bad name to anarchists.

 You are irrational because you cannot seem to grasp that degrees of
 inequality -- degrees graphically illustrated in that video for those
 otherwise ignorant of the actual numbers (such as yourself) -- those
 degrees matter as a symptom of an underlying disease in society if not the
 disease itself.

 Look, its simple:

 Civilization enables accumulation of property beyond the homestead -- the
 accumulation of what might be called artificial property.  Artificial
 property rights are therefore the proper tax base.  Basing your taxes on
 economic activity is crazy and leads to run-away centralization of wealth.
  It is an obvious failure mode of civilization as the wealthy are prone to
 institutional capture in order to shift the tax base from wealth to
 economic activity.

 I laid all this out, including macroeconomic as well as microeconomic
 aspects in a white paper over 2 decades ago but the current short story is
 as follows:

 Tax the liquid value of artificial property rights at the risk free
 interest rate of modern portfolio theory.  Establish liquid value via
 escrowed bids.  The high escrowed bid for a property right receives
 interest at the risk free interest rate.  Other bids do not.

 This gets rid of what might be called private sector economic rent as a
 corrupting influence on civilization.

 However, it leaves public sector rent seeking as a moral hazard.  This is
 best dealt with by distributing revenues as a citizen's dividend -- equally
 to all citizens -- and requiring national defense to be decentralized as it
 is with the Swiss.




 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known
 for decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described
 in Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread James Bowery
Erratum:  If you... - You...

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 To be clear, when I say irrational I mean it literally in the sense of
 Greek philosophy's emphasis on ratio:

 If you can't take a number out of context -- that is to say, a number
 without respect to another number which may provide a ratio.  To attempt to
 do so is irRATIOnal.

 Yes inequality of wealth will always be with us.

 To read people talking about comparative degrees of inequality is to deny
 their RATIOnality.

 In your mind there are two positions to the discourse:  equality and
 inequality.  This is quite clearly irrational.



 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote:

 Dear James,

 I will not discuss here about subjects that are not related to LENR.
 Actually you are not speaking about my opinion, inequality is a fact both
 in Nature and in societies, I am not ignorant about any actual numbers or
 the Gini coefficients worldwide. You are over-complicating the facts,
 inequality goes beyond taxes and even political regimes. What a dredful
 inequality is in North Korea! The dictator is  a god, many people die of
 hunger etc and from inside nothing can be changed.
 By the way, when I have worked in journalism (2002-2010) I could follow
 the steady increase of inequality worldwide on the Web and in practice in
 my country, It is a very powerful process. I remember using the following
 quote for one of my writings about Inequality:

 “*Nature* is unfair? So much the better, inequality is the only
 bearable thing, the monotony of equality can only lead us to boredom”. 
 *Francis
 Picabia quote*

 Nature's main aim is interestingness.

 I will continue this discussion only in private, Vortex has to be focused
 on LENR, it was almost destroyed by a Troll.
  Peter

 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 6:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Peter, to be polite, your view is irrationally anti-civilization.  It is
 so irrational that it gives a bad name to anarchists.

 You are irrational because you cannot seem to grasp that degrees of
 inequality -- degrees graphically illustrated in that video for those
 otherwise ignorant of the actual numbers (such as yourself) -- those
 degrees matter as a symptom of an underlying disease in society if not the
 disease itself.

 Look, its simple:

 Civilization enables accumulation of property beyond the homestead --
 the accumulation of what might be called artificial property.  Artificial
 property rights are therefore the proper tax base.  Basing your taxes on
 economic activity is crazy and leads to run-away centralization of wealth.
  It is an obvious failure mode of civilization as the wealthy are prone to
 institutional capture in order to shift the tax base from wealth to
 economic activity.

 I laid all this out, including macroeconomic as well as microeconomic
 aspects in a white paper over 2 decades ago but the current short story is
 as follows:

 Tax the liquid value of artificial property rights at the risk free
 interest rate of modern portfolio theory.  Establish liquid value via
 escrowed bids.  The high escrowed bid for a property right receives
 interest at the risk free interest rate.  Other bids do not.

 This gets rid of what might be called private sector economic rent as
 a corrupting influence on civilization.

 However, it leaves public sector rent seeking as a moral hazard.  This
 is best dealt with by distributing revenues as a citizen's dividend --
 equally to all citizens -- and requiring national defense to be
 decentralized as it is with the Swiss.




 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan
 by N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known
 for decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare 
 described
 in Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is 
 not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Harry Veeder
Dear Peter, I think you choosing between the  western style
inequality of the 1960's with
Soviet style equality. However, western  style inequality of today
is wicked.

harry


On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
 Dear James,

 I will not discuss here about subjects that are not related to LENR.
 Actually you are not speaking about my opinion, inequality is a fact both in
 Nature and in societies, I am not ignorant about any actual numbers or the
 Gini coefficients worldwide. You are over-complicating the facts, inequality
 goes beyond taxes and even political regimes. What a dredful inequality is
 in North Korea! The dictator is  a god, many people die of hunger etc and
 from inside nothing can be changed.
 By the way, when I have worked in journalism (2002-2010) I could follow the
 steady increase of inequality worldwide on the Web and in practice in my
 country, It is a very powerful process. I remember using the following quote
 for one of my writings about Inequality:

 “Nature is unfair? So much the better, inequality is the only bearable
 thing, the monotony of equality can only lead us to boredom”. Francis
 Picabia quote

 Nature's main aim is interestingness.

 I will continue this discussion only in private, Vortex has to be focused on
 LENR, it was almost destroyed by a Troll.
 Peter

 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 6:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Peter, to be polite, your view is irrationally anti-civilization.  It is
 so irrational that it gives a bad name to anarchists.

 You are irrational because you cannot seem to grasp that degrees of
 inequality -- degrees graphically illustrated in that video for those
 otherwise ignorant of the actual numbers (such as yourself) -- those degrees
 matter as a symptom of an underlying disease in society if not the disease
 itself.

 Look, its simple:

 Civilization enables accumulation of property beyond the homestead -- the
 accumulation of what might be called artificial property.  Artificial
 property rights are therefore the proper tax base.  Basing your taxes on
 economic activity is crazy and leads to run-away centralization of wealth.
 It is an obvious failure mode of civilization as the wealthy are prone to
 institutional capture in order to shift the tax base from wealth to economic
 activity.

 I laid all this out, including macroeconomic as well as microeconomic
 aspects in a white paper over 2 decades ago but the current short story is
 as follows:

 Tax the liquid value of artificial property rights at the risk free
 interest rate of modern portfolio theory.  Establish liquid value via
 escrowed bids.  The high escrowed bid for a property right receives interest
 at the risk free interest rate.  Other bids do not.

 This gets rid of what might be called private sector economic rent as a
 corrupting influence on civilization.

 However, it leaves public sector rent seeking as a moral hazard.  This is
 best dealt with by distributing revenues as a citizen's dividend -- equally
 to all citizens -- and requiring national defense to be decentralized as it
 is with the Swiss.




 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Inequality is  a law of Nature. Now, when we are living in Moneytheism,
 it is applied to wealth, in the dawn of the human societies it was already
 applied to power. (who has invented kings, emperors, dictators?) Re-read
 please the chapter about Mediocristan and Extremistan in the Black Swan by
 N.N. Taleb  a great book to be read by LENR workers of all ages,too.
 Democracy can scratch a bit at the surface of Inequality but cannot
 change the situation much.
 Peter


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 That is depressing. The facts described in it have been widely known for
 decades. It is like the extreme cost variations of healthcare described in
 Time magazine the other day. Educated people know about it but it is not
 considered politically correct to discuss it in the mass media or during
 political campaigns.

 - Jed




 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





 --
 Dr. Peter Gluck
 Cluj, Romania
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com



Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Jouni Valkonen

On Mar 4, 2013, at 7:27 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yes inequality of wealth will always be with us. 
 

As Vortex L is a science forum, then scientifically speaking what level of 
inequality would be preferred? Sociological and economical aspects are good to 
be considered.

Inequality is not something that is discretely on/off but it is matter of 
degree and lots of grey shades.

Platon was an advocate of inequality, because he thought that richest people 
should earn five times as much as common people. Is this good level of 
inequality?

—Jouni


Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Jed Rothwell
See also:

Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/

This is the root of the problem.

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Paul Breed
Buffett says his rate is lower  while at the same time the company he owns
is having a major battle with the IRS.

With both Liberal:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/warren-buffett-taxes-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html

and  Conservative references:
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/buffett-irs-back-taxes/2011/09/01/id/409520

Do as I say not as I do.


On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 See also:

 Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/

 This is the root of the problem.

 - Jed




Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread James Bowery
When you see public policies that offer you an opportunity to profit at the
expense of society, the proper response is to proclaim the policies as bad
while you go ahead and exploit those profit opportunities so you can remain
competitive against those who would silently profit at society's expense.

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com wrote:

 Buffett says his rate is lower  while at the same time the company he owns
 is having a major battle with the IRS.

 With both Liberal:

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/warren-buffett-taxes-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html

 and  Conservative references:
 http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/buffett-irs-back-taxes/2011/09/01/id/409520

 Do as I say not as I do.


 On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 See also:

 Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/

 This is the root of the problem.

 - Jed





Re: [Vo]:OT: Wealth and Inequality in U.S.

2013-03-04 Thread Joe Hughes
i would much prefer to live in a world where the immediate discussion on 
stories such as this was how can we increase government productivity and 
eliminate inefficiencies so the secretary's rate could be reduced below that of 
his not to immediately want to raise his. 

Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com wrote:

Buffett says his rate is lower  while at the same time the company he owns
is having a major battle with the IRS.

With both Liberal:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/warren-buffett-taxes-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html

and  Conservative references:
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/buffett-irs-back-taxes/2011/09/01/id/409520

Do as I say not as I do.


On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 See also:

 Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/04/news/economy/buffett-secretary-taxes/

 This is the root of the problem.

 - Jed