If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
Judah wrote:
Labor is not nothing, but I would contend that it also does not create wealth. If it did, the manual laborers would be the wealthy ones. Labor is not limited to *manual* labor. Try thinking of labor as action by people. These actions includes invention and organization as well as digging ditches. Invention is what increases productivity and efficiency. Without these increases we would still be dragging deer we killed with rocks back to the cave by hand, digging ditches with a stick and waiting for the invention of fire. ...the only way to create wealth in either of these two endeavors is to redistribute these assets... Increases in productivity and efficiency are what increase wealth. If this were not true then we would have five billion people trying to live in the same cave eating the same deer. Redistribution has nothing, by definition, with the creation anything. No food, no shelter, nothing is made by redistribution. It should only be used to provide for those who are actually unable to provide for themselves. It is a form of charity, not production. |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Judah wrote:
I made no mention of stealing. The Free Market in the US requires that people redistribute assets in order to get rich. Most people don't get rich based solely on their hourly rate. They get rich by buying low and selling high - real estate, stocks, antiques on a road show, or whatever. In the free market economy, someone wins, and someone loses. You seem to be mired in the assumption that there is some magical collection of assets that can only be redistributed. This is patently false; it ignores the reality that new and valuable assets are driven principaly by invovation. Take a recent very simple example: the asset value of the computer industry world wide today is hundreds of billions of dollars. These assets simply *did not exist* before the invention of the computer, neither did the millions of jobs in this sector. Market speculation is one way to get rich, however even here you may get confused. The speculators are the ones who get rich or poor, not the companies that the stocks represent. |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... I believe I said that. Let me change that to: the average G/A guy who flys a small IFR-equipped (with IFR GPS) a 100 hours a year and often utilizies GPS instrument approach procedures at small airports (of which there are hundreds now, if not thousands) doesn't begin to pay for the system. The average G/A guy who flies a small IFR-equipped (with IFR GPS) airplane 100 hours a year and often utilizes GPS instrument approach procedures at small airports doesn't begin to put a burden on the system. |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Not since the advent of GPS approaches. Thousands have been issued for small airports, and those cost just as much as a GPS approach for Green Bay Interuniversal Skyport. Well, if you can confidently make that statement, you must know the cost to create a GPS approach. What is that cost? |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
|
#156
|
|||
|
|||
"Otis Winslow" wrote in message ... I would hardly call Libertarians very conservative. While the free market position could lead one to think that ... the general approach of us being able to do our own thing as long as we don't interfere with others exercising that same freedom is a long way away from the ultra conservative approach. They want to control our every action and make our moral judgements for us. It is liberals that wish to control other people. |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
"Judah" wrote in message ... Actually, CJ, you should go back and follow the thread a little more closely, and maybe read it without your blinders on. The conservative view presented was that liberals want to take other people's assets and redistribute them. I responded that conservatives want to take other people's assets and keep them for themselves. The response was that conservatives don't want other people's assets, and I disagree with that completely. Your disagreement does not make it a false statement. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
|
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Hey come on, now. Cut me a break. You know what I meant!
I was just feeding a troll, anyway! "Newps" wrote in : "Judah" wrote in message ... Put it in perspective. At MOST, the 100-hour per year pilot uses 100 hours of ATC time per year. The Airline pilot, who flies back and forth across the country twice a day, uses 100 hours of ATC time in about a week. Considering an airline pilot flies 80 hours a month, this is a pretty neat trick. |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Doug Carter wrote:
Judah wrote: "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in link.net: How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other people's assets? By creating wealth. Ex Nihilo? Perhaps you mean 'Creatio Ex Nihilo', create something out of nothing. If so, you claim that the value of labor = zero. Marx would not approve. What did Groucho know about economics anyway? :-) Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. | Bush Air | Home Built | 0 | May 25th 04 06:18 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
Photographer seeking 2 pilots / warbirds for photo shoot | Wings Of Fury | Aerobatics | 0 | February 26th 04 05:59 PM |