3 ms·

I have a decent income (s.t. it would be measurably reduced in an income redistribution situation) and I want it for self-interest reasons as well. I would be t

by TACIXAT 10y ago

I have a decent income (s.t. it would be measurably reduced in an income redistribution situation) and I want it for self-interest reasons as well. I would be taxed more, sure, but I wouldn't have to worry about someone robbing me because they are starving. If we could improve the stability of society by giving the less fortunate a little off the top, that is really in line with my interests.

grb423 10y ago
Voluntary charity is always an option for you. Don't most people mean mandatory, state-controlled taking from you to give to someone else when discussing this subject? Would you support "measurably reducing" my income so you don't get robbed? So I don't get robbed?
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Yes I (and probably the parent) mean mandatory state-controlled taxation. Yes we support measurably reducing both of our incomes so neither of us get robbed. And yes I support doing so against your wishes if a majority of society votes for it. If you object to that, please make that argument instead of just asking rhetorical questions.
- TACIXAT 10y ago
  Absolutely. I had a computer and internet access growing up, now I have a high paying computer job. A lot of people did not and do not have that. I'm happy taking from someone who is making a decent income and giving it to those who are not. A lot of my coworkers have the opinion, "Ok, you donate but don't tell me what to do with my money." They'd love to privatize roads, just live on their land and forget all else. It's silly though, we're in a society, the people at the bottom support the people at the top. The people at the bottom don't have the same opportunity as the people at the top. Give me the chance and I'd be a benevolent dictator and rather than give computer guy a chance to own a Tesla, make sure no one at the bottom knows what hunger is.
brbsix 10y ago
Are you presently worried about someone robbing you because they are starving? In the third-world, absolutely. In the United States anyone who's starving has ready access to SNAP, food banks, or (worse-case scenario) dumpstered groceries. I'd be more concerned about being robbed because someone has a serious substance-abuse issue, was raised in a broken single-parent household, there's a complete lack of entry-level jobs, or something of that sort, none of which is aided (but rather is perhaps aggravated) by increased levels of income redistribution.
- TACIXAT 10y ago
  I'm in Baltimore, and as mediocre as it is, most of the danger one faces is just teenagers in groups being stupid teenagers (if you're not involved in drugs the crime from that world doesn't affect you as much, unless you're stuck living in one of those neighborhoods). Property crime is done more so by addicts looking to steal your gardening equipment. So yea, hunger generally isn't what leads directly to crime, but the crime does exist because these teenagers have wants and needs that aren't being met, to the point that they would rob someone, steal their bike, etc. There are kids here who sell cold water and soda on the street corners to make money. If they're working selling drinks on their summer break, they probably know what hunger is.

by TACIXAT 10y ago

grb423 10y ago

Voluntary charity is always an option for you. Don't most people mean mandatory, state-controlled taking from you to give to someone else when discussing this subject? Would you support "measurably reducing" my income so you don't get robbed? So I don't get robbed?

aninhumer 10y ago
Yes I (and probably the parent) mean mandatory state-controlled taxation. Yes we support measurably reducing both of our incomes so neither of us get robbed. And yes I support doing so against your wishes if a majority of society votes for it. If you object to that, please make that argument instead of just asking rhetorical questions.
TACIXAT 10y ago
Absolutely. I had a computer and internet access growing up, now I have a high paying computer job. A lot of people did not and do not have that. I'm happy taking from someone who is making a decent income and giving it to those who are not. A lot of my coworkers have the opinion, "Ok, you donate but don't tell me what to do with my money." They'd love to privatize roads, just live on their land and forget all else. It's silly though, we're in a society, the people at the bottom support the people at the top. The people at the bottom don't have the same opportunity as the people at the top. Give me the chance and I'd be a benevolent dictator and rather than give computer guy a chance to own a Tesla, make sure no one at the bottom knows what hunger is.

brbsix 10y ago

Are you presently worried about someone robbing you because they are starving? In the third-world, absolutely. In the United States anyone who's starving has ready access to SNAP, food banks, or (worse-case scenario) dumpstered groceries. I'd be more concerned about being robbed because someone has a serious substance-abuse issue, was raised in a broken single-parent household, there's a complete lack of entry-level jobs, or something of that sort, none of which is aided (but rather is perhaps aggravated) by increased levels of income redistribution.

TACIXAT 10y ago
I'm in Baltimore, and as mediocre as it is, most of the danger one faces is just teenagers in groups being stupid teenagers (if you're not involved in drugs the crime from that world doesn't affect you as much, unless you're stuck living in one of those neighborhoods). Property crime is done more so by addicts looking to steal your gardening equipment. So yea, hunger generally isn't what leads directly to crime, but the crime does exist because these teenagers have wants and needs that aren't being met, to the point that they would rob someone, steal their bike, etc. There are kids here who sell cold water and soda on the street corners to make money. If they're working selling drinks on their summer break, they probably know what hunger is.