Capitalist Philosophers And Fundamentalist Protestants

[Propertarian]

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ] Only true at a 100% estate tax rate for all inheritance, which isn't advocated by many people (an understatement).

Actually, even then part of it would go back to his family in gov't programs...

[51cards]

I don't even get it. Is 'deserved' anything more than your opinion? This is just weak. I'm disappointed. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[SNOWBALL]

David,

Someone told me that you are a republican. It blows me away that any republican could make posts like this. Feel free to just ignore this post, because I don't want to derail your thread, and I think you have a right to personal privacy re: your political stances. Good post.

Best,
Jordan

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
"Is there a list somewhere of "What we deserve" and who wrote the list, and who enforces it and what were the criteria."

Now you are just being silly and everyone here knows it.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[Nielsio]

So... the group with guns decides who deserves what? And at the same time they prevent others from trying to do the same 'moral' acts, based on...?

No, it seems you are trying to rationalize the use of force by your favourite group of thugs.

Also: you are talking about your family, not the government. Just so that you are aware of it.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Is there a list somewhere of "What we deserve" and who wrote the list, and who enforces it and what were the criteria."

Now you are just being silly and everyone here knows it.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you hear a whoooosh sound and have to duck? It is meant to be silly. cheeez. it's trying to point out the silliness of posing a problem that has a) a premise that is false factually b) a premise that a lot of the people you're trying to debate will disagree with anyway (even if you truly believed it is true). So, the problem as posed won't answer the question you want and can't be moved forward.

You'll note that other posted have challenged the exact same premise. so the TRUTH of DS statement "Now you are just being silly and everyone here knows it." must only refer to the form not the content of my objection.

i gotta use more smilies, luckyme

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
People who are rich for technical capitalistic reasons do not truly deserve to be a lot better off than hardworking chemists in Burma. Period. Philosophers who try to claim otherwise are rationalizing.


[/ QUOTE ]

O Almighty Lord, will You send us to hell if we don't accept this scripture?

[ QUOTE ]
Otherwise don't be mortified if you get scammed or go to hell.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow! You answered my question in the same post. Cool [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[David Sklansky]

"David,

Someone told me that you are a republican. It blows me away that any republican could make posts like this. Feel free to just ignore this post, because I don't want to derail your thread, and I think you have a right to personal privacy re: your political stances. Good post."

I am only sympathetic to people in bad shape when it is no fault of their own. Disabled people, discriminated against minorities, diligigent people from poor countries. Americans who didn't study in school and now work in factories are overpaid.

[Borodog]

Philosophers who attempt to rationalize who "deserves" what is voluntarily given to them and who does not make me nauseous.

It pains me to say this because I have admired your intellect, company, and products for a long time, but you are truly a hypocrite.

[David Sklansky]

Why