I currently make above $80,000. I have made a little more than that in the recent past, and MUCH MUCH less than that in the more distant past.<br><br>I'm certainly not speaking for everyone, but what I do now is MUCH MUCH easier and more rewarding than what I did when I earned $7.50 an hour, or $12.00 an hour.<br>
<br>I think it's a sad myth that those who make less money work less hard than those who 'generate' wealth. Some who hold that position have undoubtedly help menial jobs. Many have not. I think you must be disqualified from making a statement like that unless you've worked a labor intensive low wage job.<br>
<br>I know that is an old canard. But I've found it true in my case. <br><br>And I've certainly 'earned' my way to where I am. I am from a very low income family, with no breaks given to me, and only through my own dumb luck and ingenuity have I reached my current position of relative economic security. However, I consensually pay my taxes, and appreciate the need of society to deal with all of it's members in an equitable and humanitarian way. When I was a child, I certainly benefitied from the Welfare system. My mom was off and on it for some time (not because she didn't work hard, but because time were tough, and she had a hard time as a single mother providing for me). Now that I'm the one paying into the system, I'm grateful to be able to help people who were once in my position. Why should I not want to pay into the system that helped me get where I am today? If not for those welfare programs, I would not be able to be where I am, nor able to pay back into the system.<br>
<br>There is no system in place in the small town I grew up in for Private Education. Where would that come from? Would I have to rely on a Religious education? What alternative system are you proposing that wouldn't require a lifetimes worth of retooling/reinventing/locating private funding for that wouldn't hamper an entire generation of future 'wealth creators?'<br>
<br>And this worship of the free market makes my skin crawl. It is a great system, with a lot going for it. But it is as morally bankrupt and corrupt as the government, or more so. How is the Free Market any less oriented toward robbery? <br>
<br>In any event, I'm not going to be able to argue this in any cohernt fashion at this point, so I should just back out.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Adam Thornton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:adam@io.com">adam@io.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">On May 19, 2009, at 5:06 PM, James Wynn wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Marginal value decreases for whom? Not to the people who work to earn it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
That's exactly what I was saying: for the people who work to earn it. At least, for *me*.<br>
<br>
I was arguing from my own experience: the marginal value of the $30,000 between an income of $30K and $60K was much, much less than of the $15,000 between $15K and $30K.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
You're argument divorces the amount of money made from the people who created it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Well, in my case, yeah, it's the same guy. Modulo Heraclitus and stuff. So that factor is controlled for.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
It assumes that a guy making $25K a year is exactly like the guy making $250K a year except that one happens to make less.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Yes and no. I mean, sure, there is a reason I eventually started getting paid more money: I was doing jobs that required skills that were rarer, or at least more valued by the people willing to employ me, and I had acquired those skills through experience and training. But on the other hand, I'm still in some important sense the me I was twenty years ago.<br>
<br>
But I'm not arguing that I shouldn't be making more money; I'm arguing that taxation taking 25% of the $60,000 of the top-earning me in my example hurts a lot less than taking 15% of the $15,000 I was making as low-earning me. (Now, to be fair, I am nowhere near sure these represent even approximate actual tax rates when those were about my income levels, and I'm not about to go digging through my tax records to find out.)<div class="im">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
It ignores the risks the second guy took in capital, time, and effort in order to create that wealth.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
How so? Those risks are compensated in the increased pay, aren't they? I mean, by your argument, I should be doing four times the work to generate four times the income, right? I'm certainly not. My job now is *much* more interesting and much less unpleasant than when I was making crap wages. Jobs that involve serious physical labor--and are thus, in many senses, the hardest--tend to also be at the bottom of the pay scale. And sure, it took a lot of time and learning to get here, but the time spent *still* beat digging ditches.<div class="im">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
It also ignores the fact that the first guy gets far more BENEFIT from non-essential government services that the second guy.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Some more, sure: I rode a lot more public transport when I was poorer than I do now. Far more, not so sure. I probably walk or ride a bike around in public parks *more* now since--again, in my experience--higher-paying jobs tend to come with more flexible schedules. There are a lot of nonessential services I don't use, and never did, but I don't begrudge the fact that I'm funding them: some people DO get value out of their services and there's value to me in those people being happier.<div class="im">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Some would say the differences therefore balance out so that both should pay the same rate.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
And I don't.<br>
<br>
Should Moe pay for half the well? I don't know. What's the benefit to him of building the well at all? What are the downsides to him if the well is not built? Should the well's costs be recouped through a per-liter charge on its usage, with the costs repaid to the financiers of the project, or is it actually going to be presented as a common good? If the latter, how much does Moe value his participation in the society that he and his neighbors constitute? If the answer is "not that much," does he get to be sad if he then has to provide his own fire protection if he withdraws from their society?<br>
<font color="#888888">
<br>
Adam</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Urth Mailing List<br>
To post, write <a href="mailto:urth@urth.net" target="_blank">urth@urth.net</a><br>
Subscription/information: <a href="http://www.urth.net" target="_blank">http://www.urth.net</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>