[Rhodes22-list] Ben C., thank you for your reply...

[Herb Parsons]

There's also the "I'm not going to play anymore" resolution. We live in 
a global economy. We make our corporate (read "rich") taxes high enough, 
the rich begin to look else where.

The "tax parable" is worth repeating:

=====

Every night, 10 men met at a restaurant for dinner. At the end of the 
meal, the bill would arrive. They owed $100 for the food that they shared.

Every night they lined up in the same order at the cash register. The 
first four men paid nothing at all. The fifth, grumbling about the 
unfairness of the situation, paid $1. The sixth man, feeling very 
generous, paid $3. The next three men paid $7, $12 and $18, respectively.

The last man was required to pay the remaining balance, $59. He realized 
that he was forced to pay for not only his own meal but the unpaid 
balance left by the first five men.

The 10 men were quite settled into their routine when the restaurant 
threw them into chaos by announcing that it was cutting its prices.

Now dinner for the 10 men would only cost $80. This clearly would not 
affect the first four men. They still ate for free. The fifth and sixth 
men both claimed their piece of the $20 right away. The fifth decided to 
forgo his $1 contribution. The sixth pitched in $2. The seventh man 
deducted $2 from his usual payment and paid $5. The eighth man paid $9. 
The ninth man paid $12, leaving the last man with a bill of $52.

Outside of the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings, and 
angry outbursts began to erupt.

The sixth man yelled, "I only got $1 out of the $20, and he got $7," 
pointing at the last man.

The fifth man joined in. "Yeah! I only got $1 too. It is unfair that he 
got seven times more than me."

The seventh man cried, "Why should he get $7 back when I only got $2?"

The nine men formed an outraged mob, surrounding the 10th man.

The first four men followed the lead of the others: "We didn't get any 
of the $20. Where is our share?"

The nine angry men carried the 10th man up to the top of a hill and 
lynched him.

The next night, the nine remaining men met at the restaurant for dinner.

But when the bill came, there was no one to pay it.


Tootle wrote:
> Ben,
>
> Start from the top.  I did not call you a Marxist.  The ‘he’ was referring
> to Obama, if you go back and read the whole paragraph.  Furthermore, I do
> not know if Obama is a Marxist.  But he fails to distinguish himself from
> them so that a dummy can tell whether he is or is not.
>
> I agree that that association alone does not make him a Marxist.  However,
> his stated political philosophy one ago year ago was parallel to Marxist
> style thinking, also know as Socialist thinking.  That is, his taxing
> proposals intimate a Marxist style or Socialist style thinking. 
> Specifically, tax the hell out of those earning a high income and spread the
> wealth.  Or were his words, share the wealth?
>
> I have a problem with this concept for several reasons.  First, it takes
> property in the form of money from one group and gives it to another group. 
> What ever the reason, it is using the huge coercive power of the government
> to take property from one group and give it to another.  Now all kinds of
> social reasons can be given for doing this.  Bob Skinner is good at
> explaining some of them.
>
> However, another reason I recognize it as a problem is that that kind of
> transfer of wealth kills or severely harms individual initiative.   I
> recognize that it is people, both ordinary and extra ordinary that thru
> personal effort, also called initiative, has made great strides in raising
> the standard of living or wellbeing of all people.  
>
> My question to you is still to discuss if Obama is using deception or
> evasion about his prior economic and political concepts?    
>
> You are one guy who should be able to discuss that issue from all sides. 
> Understand to some it is an honesty or integrity question.
>
> Please take your time to do so, and Thank You.
>
> Ed K
> Greenville, SC, USA
> (Sorry Andrew no attachment)
>
>
>