Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Should there be limits on personal wealth? I question if it is wise to allow private individuals in our society to amass huge quantities of wealth. I believe that this puts too much power in the hands of people who do not deserve it.
The only limits should be personally imposed limits. People should, of course, try to limit their own greed. Some folks use their hard earned wisely and others just seem self absorbed but freedom is a cool thing.
Feel free to contact me if ever you need to offload some of yours.
Should there be limits on personal wealth? I question if it is wise to allow private individuals in our society to amass huge quantities of wealth. I believe that this puts too much power in the hands of people who do not deserve it.
And just who or what determines they “do not deserve it?” And who or what determines “limits on personal wealth?” In both cases, that amounts to some other people who then manage to accrue a good chunk of that wealth they’ve removed from others.
Ah! I know. Committee of the “people,” always a favorite authority with which to claim justification for imposing restrictions onto others, who somehow aren’t included in “the people.” It seems to turn out that “the people” includes only those who agree with that imposition onto someone else.
No limits. Besides, all that money is invested somewhere, and creates jobs. The wealthy are better at investing in the right things. That’s how they got so wealthy - they are smarter. Then, we tax the income at a fair rate. No problem. I’d rather Warren Buffett have the bulk of the money than John Boehmer or Nancy Pelosi.
No limits. Besides, all that money is invested somewhere, and creates jobs. The wealthy are better at investing in the right things. That’s how they got so wealthy - they are smarter. Then, we tax the income at a fair rate. No problem. I’d rather Warren Buffett have the bulk of the money than John Boehmer or Nancy Pelosi.
Heard yesterday that 5% of the population creates 40% of the retail trade. Somehow reduce by some means the wealth of that 5%, what impact will that have on that 40%?
If “we the people” are serious about establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, then I do tend to think that there should be limits on personal wealth until those goals are achieved. That said, I would have no idea how to go about doing something like that, and, rationally, do not believe that it’s a viable solution, merely the ethical one.
If “we the people” are serious about establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, then I do tend to think that there should be limits on personal wealth until those goals are achieved. That said, I would have no idea how to go about doing something like that, and, rationally, do not believe that it’s a viable solution, merely the ethical one.
If it is not viable, then ethicality makes no sense.
If “we the people” are serious about establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, then I do tend to think that there should be limits on personal wealth until those goals are achieved. That said, I would have no idea how to go about doing something like that, and, rationally, do not believe that it’s a viable solution, merely the ethical one.
If it is not viable, then ethicality makes no sense.
Ok, viable was not the best choice of words. Achievable is what I should have said.
Should there be limits on personal wealth? I question if it is wise to allow private individuals in our society to amass huge quantities of wealth. I believe that this puts too much power in the hands of people who do not deserve it.
That’d be great, until Harrison Bergeron comes along and farks the whole system.
If “we the people” are serious about establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, then I do tend to think that there should be limits on personal wealth until those goals are achieved. That said, I would have no idea how to go about doing something like that, and, rationally, do not believe that it’s a viable solution, merely the ethical one.
If it is not viable, then ethicality makes no sense.
Ok, viable was not the best choice of words. Achievable is what I should have said.
If it not achievable, then ethicality makes no sense.
