Text 14346, 91 rader
Skriven 2007-05-09 11:02:52 av Jon (716.babylon5)
  Kommentar till text 14296 av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated (666.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Being Poor
======================
I don't like to get involved with these kind of discussion.  But it's
pretty easy to look at the logic of these things.  Taxes are bad.  If
the government actually applies half of what it takes to the proper
runnings of society (roads, police) then we'd be in good shape.  One
example I've seen, is that the military, one of the government's more
efficient machines (compared to places filled with a lot more
bureaucracy like the DMV..schools..etc.) just up and LOST a trillion
dollars a few years back.  Lost a TRILLION dollars.  Oops!  Must have
misplaced it in my pants somewhere.  It goes to show that any
monopolistic company (yes, the government is a monopolistic company
that employs over 50% of the US now..very scary number) is going to be
completely inefficient.   It would stand to reason that if the
government had less, they would find ways to be more efficient with
the money they had.  Because they would have to be more efficient.
Instead of just finding ways to take more of our money, they should
try to do with far less than what we give them (which is highway
robbery).  It was Heilein who wrote that instead of making rules of
what the government can do, it's better to write what the government
CAN'T do, and I wish they would stick to that.

Part two of my "taxes are bad" analysis:  Here's how it'll work.  Most
of the "rich" are small businessmen who have a hundred thousand a year
or two, or their companies which make about that much.  Story time.
Say Mr. Small Businessman has 4 employees.  The government, in an
attempt to provide whatever lousy service theyr'e going to provide
that would be done better by a private company, decides they need to
raise Mr. Small Businessman's taxes in order to pay for their new
grand idea for utopia.  Mr. Small Businessman still makes the same
amount of money.  Now, he has to pay more.  He now has less of a pool
of money to pay for the operating costs of his business.  Mr. Small
Businessman panics as he looks at his income statement and realizes he
will now be taking a loss.  He either has to shut the business down,
or fire one of his employees.  Mr. Small Businessman then regretfully
lets his employee go so he can maintain his business.  Now, there's
more unemployeed people.  The government panics, because we don't want
poor people.  That wouldn't do.  So the government passes legislation
to raise taxes on Mr. Small Businessman to help cover an extended
welfare for those unemployed.  Mr. Small Businessman now has less of a
pool to pay for the operating costs of his business.  I think you can
see where it goes from there.

Next, I'm going to be pretty darn controversial here.  The US really
doesn't have that many poor people.  We're at pretty much over
capacity for full employment.  Companies are starved for people to
work for them right now.  Something ridiculous like 85% of people in
the "poor" brackett own their own car even.  The problem is we have
this cultural fixation of watching Paris Hilton or whatever party it
up like crazy.  Super-sweet 16 whatever garbage, living a disgusting
lifestyle, and we think..I can't do that!  I have bills to pay!  So we
think we're poor.  And relatively to Ms. Hilton, we are.  But that's
relative.  Our poor in another country would be like a czar there.
Our culture tells us it's very important to go buy a new DVD player so
we're not the only one without one.  Acting responsibly, people
wouldn't do that, but Americans don't act responsibly.  We spend
something like 101% of every paycheck we take in.  There's where the
real problem lies.  Save.  It kills me, but I know people very close
to me who come very close to having significant problems financially.
What I've noticed in their pattern, is when times are up and they have
a little bit of money, they go out and buy new clothes, dvds, go out
and party, whatever.  But they're still living paycheck to paycheck.

I always say "weren't you just complaining about your money troubles a
week ago saying you were completely broke?"

And the answer always is "yeah, but I have money now."  I reply, "you
do?"

To which I get the response, "Yeah, just got a $600 refund check for
xyz."

I say, "$600 isn't very much...don't you think you should save it?"

"Nah, I'll be fine."

I've had this conversation many, many times with people.  It's really
hard to encourage people to save in a world that has glorified instant
gratification to the extent that it has.  Funny I haven't heard a
politician ever tell the American people to save.  I bet you if people
were hearing that message, our people would be better off.  It's hard
to be popular like that when your opponents keep trying to one up you
like a used car salesman, promising more and more, while delivering
less and less.  One of the flaws of our system.

I could go into the whole economics process of saving -> investment ->
greater standard of living, but I won't because that sort of logic
makes people yawn and their eyes glaze over.  The stories I just told
will get more response.

/endrant
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)