ANY concentration of power can potentially lead to tyranny... -- SPEAK UP

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 21:41:25 11/02/02 Sat
Author: Pogo
Author Host/IP: user-2ivfkcd.dialup.mindspring.com / 165.247.209.141
Subject: ANY concentration of power can potentially lead to tyranny...
In reply to: Richard 's message, "Discussing Paul Krugman's thoughts on the income gap" on 15:01:18 10/22/02 Tue

whether it be in the hands of an individual or in the state, the danger is there, nonetheless.

As for your contention that Krugman's comparison is an instance of apples and oranges, that is true to a degree, but not so much so that one can conclude there is no relationship between concentration of wealth and poverty--variability does not infer infinity, but rather, fluidity. Furthermore, of all the so-called great fortunes that have been amassed, how many do you think involved no cheating, impropriety, or exploitation? I think you'd be hard-pressed to show one such example-- Wal-Mart and Microsoft not being supportive of your contention that concentration of wealth/power is for the greater good. Yes, there is some upside, but plenty of downside, as well. Wal-Mart's seemingly low prices are subsidized by the utilization of cheap labor, which undercuts wages here at home. Lose a relatively high paying manufacturing job? No problem--Wal-mart will be glad to give you a job in the glamorous service sector, where you won't be paid especially well, but you will get to interact with price-conscious morons who don't seem to mind that large volumes of capital are being sucked out of their local economies. As for Microsoft, I don't consider a shoddy, security-plagued OS to be an example of progress or innovation, do you?

Cheers

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]