[hmkpoker]

Deserves ain't got nothing to do with it.

Personally, I am a hard determinist. Ultimately no one really "deserves" anything; we're just the sum of everything that came before us.

The reason for property rights, or whatever system we implement that rewards a certain behavior and punishes another, is much better looked at consequentially than deontologically. A capitalist system will prosper more than a non-capitalist system; "justice," imho, is a much lesser priority.

[ QUOTE ]
But there are planty of people who are wealthy because of the nature of the capitalist system. Options traders, baseball players, rock stars etc. Almost all of them would continue to do what they do if their salary was cut by 80% whether they liked their job or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't the doctors you mentioned also wealthy because of the capitalist system? They make their money based on trade of personal property, just like rock bands and athletes. No oneis forced to go to a playoff game, yet many, many people are willing to pay top dollar for it. Who are you, or anyone else, to tell them that it's wrong?

[ QUOTE ]
But the fact that we won't allow these people to be stolen from in no way implies that they "deserve" their money or that some high quality people don't "deserve" to have it transferred to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

You cannot limit rewards for the undeserving without also limiting rewards for the deserving. Many people think it is wrong to allow a rich kid to inherit millions of dollars, yet to implement a system to counteract that deprives another man the right to work hard and raise security and prosperity for his family.