From: laelth@yabbs
To: maedhros@yabbs
Subject: Deserve?
Date: Mon Feb 14 00:37:25 1994

Laelth smiles at Maredhros and says, "Lets be precise, shall we?"

*Parry #1*
    It seems we misunderstood eachother once again.  Most of your argument 
is based on a statement which I intended to be humerous rather than 
literal.  When I said I advocated legal theft (taxation), I did not mean 
that I condoned any crime perpetrated by the government upon a class of 
people.  In no way do I advocate class rape, or class murder, as I'm sure 
you know.  I'll forgive this feeble attempt to discredit me, but only 
because it is so easily parried.  In fact, the post to which you refer 
makes very clear that taxation is OK only because the people have granted 
the government the power to tax.  They have not granted the government the 
power to rape, although many states have legalized murder (the death 
penalty).  That debate, howver, must wait.  For now suffice it to say that 
I commit no logical fallicy here.  The government has been granted by the 
people the power to tax (not rape).  Thus, taxation is OK.  At this stage, 
I feel you should go back to post #419.  Most of your arguments are based 
upon this *misunderstanding,* and little of what you say there seems 
relevant once this issue is clarified.

*Parry #2*
    Absolutely, deserve is a relative term.  That's why I don't like using 
it in connection with the word "earn."  It's a dangerous combination.  And 
yes, thank you for creating the math that my argument lacked.  I'll grant 
you that  E=W*D, but only where E=income (not earnings).  "Earnings" 
assumed that you "earned" what you got paid, which I don't believe.  You 
may have "gotten" x dollars, but you didn't in any way "create" that 
money, or the wealth (stuff, things) that you can buy with that money.  
Since you didn't create those things, then you didn't "earn" them.
In any case, all I said about the system that distributes wealth in our 
society is that it's not fair.  I'll grant that E=W*D may be the system 
that decides how wealth is distributed, but is it fair?  True, I speak 
only from my own subjective point of view.  Fair is a relative term (as if 
some terms weren't?).  Nevertheless, do you really want to argue that the 
current system is fair?  Do you want to argue that it's fair for Bush to 
earn $22 million/year for doing nothing (at this stage of his life), while 
the poor man from my example is earning less than $20,000/yea while
holding down two jobs?  Is that fair?

Forgive me all.  Maedhros pages me as we speak, but I shall return with 
parry #3.

-laelth