The rich are very useful

Originally posted by kmax87
I dont know why but to me there's a big difference between inheriting wealth in the form of cash and wealth in the form of a business. A business still has to be run and if you have no smarts it will probably be run into the ground without much effort. Plus businesses employ people so its not just like cash, it directly benefits people which from my perspecti ...[text shortened]... often than not will act in very callous manner to ordinary, very decent, hard working folk.

You're basing your argument on .....?

Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
You're basing your argument on .....?

since when has substance been a test for making a point on debates.....?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
The sins of the fathers do not pass on to the sons...

But the profits do!

EDIT - I'm curious...the OP says the existence of wealth enhances competition...but how does it enhance competition by concentrating resources in a few hands? There's a LOT of human capital out there that is not contributing to that competition because of the existence of inherited stolen wealth.

Im familiar with this argument and once again this doesn't change anything.

Slavery was a deplorable system, but that doesn't mean that those who benefited from it never give back to society in any way, the most affluent are necessary for the existence of a prosperous society. The benefits to society can be seen in many ways, whether it be in tax revenue, employment, the establishment of businesses, etc.

Originally posted by generalissimo
Im familiar with this argument and once again this doesn't change anything.

Slavery was a deplorable system, but that doesn't mean that those who benefited from it never give back to society in any way, the most affluent are necessary for the existence of a prosperous society. The benefits to society can be seen in many ways, whether it be in tax revenue, employment, the establishment of businesses, etc.

You have to look at opportunity cost. In my opinion the wealthy act as an informal cartel, suppressing competition.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You have to look at opportunity cost. In my opinion the wealthy act as an informal cartel, suppressing competition.

There is no point in having a competition if you're not allowed to compete with them, I assume you'll appeal to monopolies given how predictable you are, and it is a fair point, however I never said there was a perfect system.

Originally posted by spruce112358
[b]The rich are the mechanism that ensures strong competition in the free market.

I realize this is point so many socialists on RHP simply don't get -- I guess no one has ever explained it properly. It is important not to tax the rich disproportionately because of a number of facts:

- competition is necessary to force efficient use of resource ...[text shortened]... working class hard -- and which the government will be effectively powerless to prevent.[/b]

Corporations have lots of money, but they're not spending it on hiring Americans and reducing unemployment. Some corporations are spending plenty on electing Republican politicians, though.