Quantum Windbag, yes, statistics can be fudged, you know what they say about lies. But the evidence is overwhelming, I included enough already, the point is past proven and like global warming only denied by those who still claim the earth is flat.
You have never presented any evidence, all you present is links to other people's opinions. That might overwhelm you, but it just makes me wonder where you got your training in logic.
Your reply to, "A society that is more equal functions better than one in which only a few possess wealth." was in contention for the revisionist comment award. You wrote, "Highly debatable opinion, and only a truth except in small minds that think their opinions mean more than the real world that surrounds them." Why don't you try living in a third world nation and let us know how it goes. The majority of people living on this earth live on under two dollars a day. Would anyone chose to be among them? You?
Most third world countries are getting richer every day, and the middle class is expanding. the ones where that is not happening are all governed by oppressive regimes that limit social movement and the creation of wealth.
Want to try again?
QW wrote, "I can point to at least one historical example of a [edit] culture that grew rich without having any recognized government. Not being an anthropologist I can not site more than that, but I am sure many exist." And that would be?
Barbary corsairs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is obvious that you have difference concepts of wealth. Plutocracies, oligarchies or totalitarian societies may have wealth galore but it exists only as potential or for the privileged few. Sometimes it exists for self aggrandizement and often war aka power. I consider wealth to be a transferable valued commodity within a society where all have opportunity to share in the benefits of that material. But thanks I have to clarify that point in my notes.
If we have different concepts of wealth it is because you confuse money and wealth.
Taxes provide the means for a well run and well regulated society. Consider all the infrastructure we all depend on, the product safety, community safety, laws and contract enforcement, regulatory structure, and the help and support of fellow citizens who are victims of the swings of capitalism and the profit greed of corporations and people. If one thing manages wealth in this nation it is law, and taxes pay for law. When taxes were highest, America had her best years. I have posted support for that often. Lowering taxes hasn't helped jobs, that much is clear even if you only view Bush Jr's failed economy. Bush one and two have the worst job records of any presidents. Bush I had help from Reagan, Bush II managed it on his own.
Taxes are the means for a government to support itself and supply needed services. Equating society and government just shows how little you understand the dynamics that go into either.
Your comment about taxes paying for law is an illustration of the problem you have. Laws exist to make society more tolerable. The way we pay for them is by accepting that there are certain things that we cannot do if we live in society, not through taxes.
Comment:
There are several salient points that need review. Conservatives (C) and liberals see the world differently. Conservatives tend to see extremes of good and bad, they long for heroes, individuals like Reagan, who become mythical and unapproachable. Bad guys are easy to spot, they are government or anyone concerned with issues that conflict with their Ayn Rand type hero. Government is the largest of the bad guys but it also poses a paradox as conservatives need government as a place for their heroes to fight the good battle and enforce their laws, but they dislike government when other heroes, such as FDR or LBJ do battle against inequality and poverty. What then happens is the battle become cloaked in symbols and words, the good and the bad, the slippery slope and soon the battle becomes the reality even though the reality remains outside the battle.
This is why I call you an arrogant asshole. You belittle an entire group of people, attempting to preform forensic psychology on them because it makes you feel better about yourself. The reason the government is the problem is because the government has power, and it is run by people. Government is not bad in and of itself, but the bigger and more powerful it is the easier it is for the people that work in it to amass power and use that power for personal goals.
That has nothing to do with heroes, or even right and wrong, it is simply common sense. Yet you discount it because you prefer to see the government as beneficial. This actually cause you to ignore the reality that you live in.
Wealth only exists in a society of free people with opportunity to take part in the wealth. Some would say the Pyramids equate to wealth but that is the narrow wealth of individual hubris. America's greatest wealth came from the security of the infrastructure FDR and his administration created; Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy/LBJ, and Nixon maintained that growth and security.
Wealth is not dependent upon society. A perfect example of this is the wealth that is currently under the ground in Afghanistan. That lithium exist completely independent of who is in control of the government there. Like I said before, you confuse wealth and money. Money only exists in society, wealth exist independent of either.
The chief C argument with equality is the distribution argument or redistribution argument. The idea points to how we frame or create our world, if our head includes the concept that taxation is stealing then one outcome follows, if instead we consider taxation a part of good citizenship and support for the nation that provides for us and others, a different outcome follows.
Here is the problem with thinking of taxation in the way you propose. If we see taxes as good citizenship we are forced to assume that the government has a right to taxes and have to justify any attempts to reduce them. This actually requires us to justify allowing anyone, even the poor, to keep wealth they accrue because it all belongs to society.
I prefer to look at taxes as something we need to pay in order to provide the services we want. We should hold the government accountable for all taxes it requests, and remind it that, ultimately, all wealth belongs to the individuals who create it. They should be required to justify all expenses and only be allowed to request more taxes from us after they have proven that they are needed it.
Another argument against a more equal society is everyone already has equal opportunity, that is complete balderdash. Our public schools and our public projects have helped greatly, but today they are a target of conservatives. It is hard to say why but conservatives are still fighting FDR and the idea of social justice. It often seems to me conservatives are fighting against America's core values.
Our public schools are a complete failure, and liberals target anyone who tries to help anyone get out of them as enemies of unions.
Tell me something, why should the DC voucher program not be expanded so that everyone who wants to send their child to the same school Obama sends his daughters to has the chance? Why are conservatives the enemy of equality simply because they want everyone to have equal opportunity, while liberals who send their children to private schools while denying other parents the same opportunity for a quality education the champions of it?
Americans select the type of country they want, we can have one similar to early twentieth century with its sweat shops and extreme poverty or we can do better. Exaggerated conclusions and or the assignment of negative values to an opponent do not win the debate. I will be accused of same but history is out there for those who read and think. Turn off that receiver and learn on your own.
We already do better. It is not the conservatives that are trying to send us back a century, it is the progressives who think we need to fix problems we had back then that no longer exist.
By the way, I refer you back to your continued attack on conservatives and the way you belittle them throughout this post. Next time you want to call other people on assigning negative values to others you might look better if you did not engage in it yourself.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/50799-is-freedom-real.html
