Re: Pardon the Digression

John Paul May (jpm@TWEB.COM)
Sat, 9 Dec 1995 00:01:05 -0600

>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, John Paul May wrote:
>
>> >> ...When nearly 1/5 of the world's richest nation lives in poverty,
>> >> when the gap between the rich and the poor has been steadily
>> >> increasing for almost 20 years,
>>
>>
>> what a coincidence! that was JUST the period during which we instituted
>> the welfare state!
>
>Bollocks. Redistribution of wealth has existed since the begining of
>society. At least in some form or another.
>
>Later,
>traun
>
>
>ps any mac users out their checked out Homer 0.94 ?

Double bollocks with bells on. Im not talking abstract prehistory. The US
happened to lean very non-redistributionary, then, it specifically started
a huge social program. The US was hunky dory (note, in a financial,
non-rich-poor-gap mannner), and then the US specifically started a
superenormous social program known as the New Deal.

The result? Look around you.

Alan asserts it is sheer coincidence. I would imagine the aim of a social
fiscal program would be to ... um ... let's think about this. Could it be
.... alter the social fiscal situation ?? <; No need for sarcasm, that's
it. So if one institutes a social fiscal program, one would reasonably say
"Lets look at the social fiscal situation in a few decades and see if
anything has changed!" OK, here I am looking around.

I can't really think of anything less coincidentally and more directly
linked to the current social-fiscal situation than the extant social-fiscal
policies of the last few decades.

Social programs either seem to 'work' like in Europe where you get a
zooification of humanity, a kind of comatose old-age-like society, with
great croissants, or they fail (a la the states) and lead to terrible
rich-poor gaps.

Naturally, if you give people money, they get poorer.

It's pretty obvious. The only way to get wealthy is to generate, ie
actually _create_, wealth, and to be good at that and do it a lot.
Self-evidently, if you give people money, they have no need or less need to
generate wealth, ie, they will not generate wealth or not as much.
Contrarily, if you take money from people they (obviously) have to generate
more and more money (wealth) so they get better and better at generating
more and more wealth. - to wit, the USA.

Give me death or give me liberty - I say it's in our nature to be explorers
and take risks. I'd rather blow up trying to fly to orbit in the
Challenger [or, on a more modest and less symbolic scale, blow myself up
financially trying some stupid business idea or invention or scheme] ..
than live to a ripe old boring age in a psychological Switzerland.
("Switzerland .. 500 years of peace and democracy, and it gives us .. the
Cuckoo Clock" -- Oscar Wilde?).

I see welfare states as an enormous expression of Fear of Death.

Homer sucks. Try ircle .. which is hard to find. I lost my copy when a
drive crashed.

____________________________________________________

www.tweb.com