Envy or jealousy

Post #16. Come back when youve logically refuted that argument.

Post #16. Come back when youve logically refuted that argument.

Yep, easy. You pointed out that I wanted wealth redistributed. Correct. You then made a leap of logic to assert that this must be due to envy. That is supposition. You need to show how a desire to redistribute wealth must result from envy. You haven't done and I don't think you can. I don't think you know what a logical necessity is. Until you've answered that your argument is just so much supposition. I'll check back in the morning to see how you got on.

No you fail. I just have to show that your wish is bourne of resentment and from your general mien in this and other posts that is obvious.

It's the Left all over - the nasty party. The party that hates people to succeed because in theor eyes it means people are left behind. The same people that want everyone to share misery because it's too much to let some people suceed because it's not fair. Thats the party of envy and no matter how much you dress it up and complain it's not so, the only place that agrees with you is your own little special echo chamber.

I honestly don't know. Which doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, we are talking about principles here.

Such as the principle of the haves returning 45%+ of their income to the have nots?

No you fail. I just have to show that your wish is bourne of resentment and from your general mien in this and other posts that is obvious.

Very poor, you haven't shown anything, just repeated the same assertion over and over as if that makes it true. I was hoping for more sport to be honest.

And you are wrong. As I said. You want to take legitamatly earnt monies from someone and give it to others because you dont think they should be allowed to have it.

Errr . . . legitimately earnt ?

So bankers that crashed the economy, got billions in bailouts (your taxes, my taxes, our taxes) hundreds of millions of which they spent in awarding themselves performance-related bonuses . . . You call that money legitimately earnt ?

And if I would rather have that same money (your taxes, my taxes, our taxes) be spent on public services instead . . . then I am displaying the politics of envy.

Oh my, where do I sign up to be a banker please? It sure beats working and paying taxes for a living

Such as the principle of the haves returning 45%+ of their income to the have nots?

Yes, sure. That is the implementation of a principle.

Yes, sure. That is the implementation of a principle.

Hmmm...

Well it sounds fine in principle but I think I've spotted a flaw in this argument...

... won't there come a point where the 'have nots' will accumulate so much wealth that they themselves will become 'haves', and the 'haves' will have given away so much of their wealth that they will become 'have nots'?

You'll then have a situation where we'll be going round in circles, where the original 'have nots' will then have to give some of their wealth to the original 'haves'...

... so really, a bit like it is at the moment?

I think it'll be less confusing if things stay as they are...

Hmmm...

 

Well it sounds fine in principle but I think I've spotted a flaw in this argument...

 

... won't there come a point where the 'have nots' will accumulate so much wealth that they themselves will become 'haves', and the 'haves' will have given away so much of their wealth that they will become 'have nots'?

 

You'll then have a situation where we'll be going round in circles, where the original 'have nots' will then have to give some of their wealth to the original 'haves'...

 

... so really, a bit like it is at the moment?

 

I think it'll be less confusing if things stay as they are...

No, I don't see by what mechanism that would necessarily happen. It would be totally feasible to have a situation where some wealth is distributed downwards while still leaving some people better off than others, or a situation where wealth was distributed evenly, or where personal wealth was abolished by putting everything in common ownership. All of these would avoid the scenario you have described.