Whenever you try to win an argument by dismissing the other side, you aren't really debating. "The belief that the rich owe some payment to society implies tha

Whenever you try to win an argument by dismissing the other side, you aren't really debating. "The belief that the rich owe some payment to society implies that society paid a cost or made some kind of sacrifice for which it must be fairly compensated. This is, of course, pure bullshit." His argument is that since it all has been paid for already, so it doesn't actually cost society anything to raise that person. I.e. the marginal cost of one rich person to society is no different than one poor person. However he acknowledges in the post without realizing it that the marginal cost of a person to society is not the issue. "It’s all been paid for already and in the case of taxpayer-funded infrastructure, it’s been paid for disproportionately by the rich." Exactly. The society which enabled the rich the oppurtunity to become rich was supported by previous generations of rich people. Congradulations, as one of the winners you now have the obligation to do what previous generations of winners have done for hundreds of years: support society so that a new crop of winners will have the oppurtunity you had. Society needs continual investment to maintain the status quo.