RE: Taxes

I think we need to consider the fact that often times people are more "successful" than others for reasons that have nothing to do with competence or ability. How many "successful" people do you know that got where they are today due to factors beyond the two mentioned above?

I agree that we need a society and government that encourages people to excel and that part of excellence is creating wealth. But I think we would be remiss and irresponsible to cast aside the lower classes and place a disproportionate burden on them. Part of the reason why rich people get rich is that they have people who in some capacity or another work for them and help to generate that wealth at a relatively low cost. To dismiss their relative "failure" and punish them for it is irresponsible as well.

Marx's criticisms of capitalism were dead on. His proposed solutions are impractical, as has been proven over the course of the last century. However, capitalism for all its glory, does produce a lower class that in essence works for the upper class. This inequity cannot be explained away by mere ability and ambition (although it is a part of it). Therefore, I don't believe that a society can justify having taxes, or anything else for that matter, that is blatently worse for the lower classes than the upper classes.

I suppose this also touches on the religious discussion a few posts before this one. For all of its faults one of the few things about organized religion that I can still appreciate is that for the most part they teach a morality that most people can appreciate and seems genuinely beneficial. This is not to say that I have no qualms with organized religions and their "moralities" but I think as a general statement most of us could agree that we would like to be treated nicely and that having a world of people who cared about others more than themselves wouldn't be a bad thing, which is what most major religions preach (among other things, many of which I have a problem with).

I suppose my point with all of this rambling is that I think we need a society that values competition as a means to success and wealth. However, with all competion there are losers. I don't think it is responsible or practical to cast the losers aside and dismiss their failure to incompetence or laziness (although many people fail for those reasons). The haves have a responsibility to some extent for the have nots, for without them, they don't exist either. What extent is a whole different question for another time.

Im not sure any of this made sense, I've been drinking. If this is a rambling mess I sincerely apologize.

- Hodges