well said.

At 07:37 AM 3/25/2007, you wrote:
>On Sunday 25 March 2007 16:41, ken barber wrote:
> > although i do think no tax at all is better.
> >
> > why should distributing wealth be one of the purposes
> > of taxes?
> > i agree that it is, but why should it be?
> >
>
>Hi Ken,
>
>Is it not a duty (as a member of the human race) to consider "others" as well
>as ourselves? (I know you will agree). ;-)
>
>The fact I have a comfortable life has very little to do with whatever meagre
>talents I may have been born with, and an awful lot to do with
>the "circumstances" of my life, i.e. my upbringing, education, family wealth
>& influence ("class" as this is the UK!!), health, and serendipitous
>opportunities. All things over which I had very little control.
>
>Just as it would be false for me to claim much credit for my wealth, equally,
>someone with a much less comfortable life should not be "blamed" for that
>fact.
>
>Given that too great an inequality in society is inevitably destructive,
>leading either to social unrest (crime, revolution, war), or loss of freedoms
>(as the State attempts to quell social unrest), a healthy society should
>ensure the gap between rich and poor is kept at an equitable balance. Direct
>taxation of wealth and high public spending on education, health, and
>welfare, is the most efficient way to redistribute this wealth.
>
>Cheers
>
>Deri
>
>-----------------------
>
>To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
>http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy