I can live with this example a hell of a lot easier than the taxman lifting that million dollars directly from the earnings of those living pay packet to pay packet. Especially when we consider the administration costs involved in funneling some on that through all the layers of beaurocracy to actually get any of that money to affect anyone on the waiting list. I would far rather the rich bloke donated directly to the hospital. Even if he only did it under pressure, even if he only did it to get an angry mob on his front lawn demanding he contribute back to the society where his money origionally came from. The difference being donation, even under durress can evolve into a social norm an a couple of shirt generations. The tax and govt spends model instantly puts those with big money or big income on the defensive. Someones trying to take money off them, they defend it with accountants and lawyers. The more you have the better you are sble to deffend if so the less you contribute. This is the current social norm and I don't blame them who wants to contribute in such an inefficent way? Construction of a social norm by where those with excess donate some of the excess back to assist others needs is far more efficient. In a broard sense their wealth came from the people, they could easily be directed towards maintaining that "resource". As mush as the robin hood hacker example directs tge funds in a positive way it leads down a slippery slope. If youre going to rush in all gung ho better off kidnapping him and forcing him to drop the money off at the hospital in cash. Makes for a wau cooler news story and would provoke more meaningful conversation within society.
Title to stolen goods NEVER changes, no matter who stole it or what they did with it. ...and who says a rich man has not earned his wealth? OC
Is robbing from the rich really better than robbing from the poor? And how rich do they have to be? A million dollars? More? Isn't it better just to say theft is wrong? Can't we be more imaginative when it comes to accomplishing things than always resorting to the "well, let's force people to pay for it" solution? Example is the NBN. What if we had a certain amount of internet companies that each bought a share of it. Corporate sponsors could put in some more. Then you could have a kickstarter like thing to attract money from the public where a certain amount of money put in would give you a certain level of benefits, like a certain percentage off your internet bill, or free internet for a year or whatever. Somehow with a bit of creative thinking I don't think taxes would have been necessary. But of course, in today's world it's the easy option. Why think creatively when you can go to the govt for money?
You know, as a follow-up, this Robin Hood, steal from the rich. give to the poor thing actually got me thinking. Why do people think it's OK to steal if the person being stolen from is rich enough and if the cause is good? I even remember thinking it myself up until a few years ago. Robin Hood, Robin Hood... hmmmm.... So Robin Hood came from around the medieval era, or middle ages, I think. Something like that. Definitely pre-industrial. What kind of society was that? Well, it was one where there really wasn't a hell of a lot of justice. If you were upper class, great, lower classes not so. If you were rich in that society then it was generally because you were one of the nobility, who were in reality just the biggest thugs around. Just a giant protection racket essentially. Noblemen would often get granted land if they had done admirably in one of the King's wars of aggression. In that kind of setting, where there essentially is no way to air your grievances with the authorities and very little chance of justice, then two wrongs would make a right in many people's eyes. It's either that or just get completely trodden on. I don't think Robin Hood actually existed, rather he was the personification of the prevailing view at the time. There would have been many outlaws I'm sure that had different aspects of him, but it became a powerful myth and tradition. What does that have to do with today? Well, I think like many traditions it has persisted in people's minds down through the centuries. Except we are in a different world today. The industrial revolution began the transformation that would give everyone in society the opportunity to make their own wealth and become rich. Initially, it was still very much the wealthy land owners, but gradually as technology has advanced more and more have become capable of achieving this. Also, there have been advances in law and order to the point where justice can be served now (it is very expensive of course because it is still a govt monopoly system, but still...). Now the rich are mostly deserving of the wealth they have amassed. For most they haven't stolen it, but made it through the market process. But myths and traditions don't go away. The fact is is that it's wrong to steal, whether from a poor person, a rich person or anything in between. In the Robin Hood days it was the establishment, represented by the Sheriff of Nottingham who were oppressing the people and keeping them down. Today, people use the establishment to try and steal from everyone in society they think doesn't deserve the money, whether that person or group earned it or not. Oh, the irony... Is it any surprise that the rich and well-connected try to use govt to protect themselves from the plunder? What else would you expect? The other interesting parallel is between Robin Hood, the outlaw or "terrorist" of the day in the establishments eyes and contrasting him with the terrorists that we know today. If a people don't have a way to air their grievances why would we be surprised that they resort to terrorism? You have to ask the question here, do people really sympathise with Robin Hood, or do they sympathise with the Sheriff of Nottingham? Or maybe some unholy mix of the two. After all, I see a lot of green and gold and Australian flags being waved. And people whingeing about how they don't get enough off the govt, which of course has to tax to get the money... So, to sum up, I think that this idea that it's OK to steal under certain circumstances has come through to us from tradition and history, when it probably had some validity. But in today's world, it is wrong to steal, simple as that. If I could wave my hand and wipe out all myth and tradition I would be sorely tempted considering how bad most of it is...
^ Tradition and history brings us the pernicious and distasteful concept of "privilege" which needs to be abolished to make real progress. True rights-based equality starts by it's removal from the collective consciousness. Wealth earned through initiation of aggression (including the privileged acting under threat of violence to others) is immoral and consequently should be subject to confiscation and return to the victims (or to society in general if the victims cannot be compensated). Importantly though, compared to history, our current governance model has tended to have a separation between the "right" to bestow privileges, how privileges are bestowed and who benefits from them to the point that the most beneficiaries had no direct action in creating them nor do they enforce them and hence are effectively blameless since they did not initiate the aggression. A king's wealth is different to a buggy whip manufacturer that benefits from a ban on motorised vehicles. Democracy has taken away the Sheriff of Nottingham and hidden him among the everyday people.
At some point I started to reference them as the 'money for nothing club', haha. A 'producing' and 'parasiting' population parts. Because in the end, no matter the title the name the clothes, that's where it comes down to.
It's this abstraction that needs to be laid bare in my opinion. But it's also not the easiest thing to do. Those who want to see it will, but for the rest... I'm not so sure privilege is a problem anymore. After all, Australia prides itself on it's supposedly egalitarian nature and that there is no upper class or lower class. Fair go for everyone and all that. Privileges that do exist have to cloak themselves in propaganda to be accepted.
Don't worry, within a day the ECB will turn up with cash that's overflowing their coffers from a rapid overnight bond sale 100% purchased by the Fed
