[Vision2020] The Nation, 6/30/08

[Tom Hansen]

My premise, Kai, is:

If the current "have nots" apply what little they receive in the form of a 
stimulus check to the basics (food, rent, bills, etc.), what makes you 
feel that these same people will irresponsibly splurge with a newly 
balanced redistribution of wealth.

What the "have nots" done with their paltry stimulus check reflects a 
sense of responsibility.

Now, do you understand?

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

> As usual, Tom, fails to grasp the conversation and tries comparing 
apples to 
> oranges.
> I will simplify it for him.
> Tom, a complete wealth distribution would begin with everyone on equal 
> financial footing. Over time, the finances of some would improve while 
for 
> others it would decline.
> My premise is that most of those who were "haves" before the 
distribution 
> would manage to accumulate wealth, becoming "haves" again.
> Of those who were "have nots" before the distribution, most would become 
> "have nots" again.
> It is a completely different scenario than your "stimulus check" 
example, in 
> which there is no "equal footing" financially.
> 
> Got it?> > must have created one MAJOR spark in the economy.
> >
> > Surprise, Kai.  It has been shown by surveys and a multitude of 
analyses
> > that the "have nots" have used their stimulus checks on such frivolous
> > items as food, rent, and bills, while the "haves" . . . well . . . you
> > know.
> >
> > Your thoughts?
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> >> Human nature is human nature.
> >> Chances are, most of the "have nots" would blow their windfall
> > purchasing
> >> things they could have never afforded before.
> >> Without thinking of the future, many people would blow right through 
it.
> >> Once gone, they would wind up selling many of the things they 
purchased
> >> because they didn't save any of it for neccesities.
> >> Many of the "haves" would see opportunities and try to make the most 
of
> >> their windfall, gaining wealth.
> >> It has nothing to do with the "worst" or "best" in humans. It's just 
the
> > way
> >> it is.
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------
> >> From: "Saundra Lund" <sslund_2007 at verizon.net>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 11:51 AM
> >> To: "'Kai Eiselein, Editor'" <editor at lataheagle.com>; "'lfalen'"
> >> <lfalen at turbonet.com>; "'keely emerinemix'" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>;
> >> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> >> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] The Nation, 6/30/08
> >>
> >> > Yes, of course I read it -- did you read the 6/30 The Nation issue
> > Keely
> >> > mentioned in starting this topic?
> >> >
> >> > I disagree with the hypothetical conclusion in your hypothetical
> > scenario.
> >> > I also don't agree with the inherent assumption of the worst of
> > humans --
> >> > you sound almost Hobbesian.  Sorry for not making that clear.  To
> > expand .
> >> > .
> >> > .
> >> >
> >> > I think the odds are good that in a wealth redistribution that some 
of
> > the
> >> > "have nots" would cherish the change, manage the money well, and 
truly
> >> > remember from whence they came.  In a wealth redistribution, I think
> > the
> >> > odds are good some of the previous "haves" would have no eye to the
> > future
> >> > and would soon be penniless . . . and need assistance.
> >> >
> >> > The difference in my hypothetical scenario & yours is that there are
> > so
> >> > many
> >> > more "have nots" than "haves" that the eventual distribution of the
> >> > redistribution would be better for the greater good and a net gain 
in
> >> > quality of life for more.  I'm not willing to assume the worst in a
> >> > hypothetical based on the self-serving historical behavior of some 
of
> > the
> >> > "haves" and their failure to consider a common good and their fellow
> >> > countrymen.
> >> >
> >> > I like to think we'd have no need to redistribute wealth if we each
> > helped
> >> > our sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, daughters and sons to
> >> > improve
> >> > their lots in life to the best of our abilities rather than just 
what
> > we
> >> > think they deserve.  Nor would we likely need government safety nets
> > for
> >> > so
> >> > many of our unfortunate were it not for the greed of the "haves."
> >> >
> >> > Altruistic Pollyanna is a name I'm far more comfortable wearing than
> > Cynic
> >> > Assuming Greed Trumps Good.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Kai Eiselein, Editor [mailto:editor at lataheagle.com]
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 11:01 AM
> >> > To: Saundra Lund; 'lfalen'; 'keely emerinemix'; 
vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Nation, 6/30/08
> >> >
> >> > Did you or did you not read my hypothetical scenario?
> >> >
> >> > --------------------------------------------------
> >> > From: "Saundra Lund" <sslund_2007 at verizon.net>
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:56 AM
> >> > To: "'Kai Eiselein, Editor'" <editor at lataheagle.com>; "'lfalen'"
> >> > <lfalen at turbonet.com>; "'keely emerinemix'" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>;
> >> > <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> >> > Subject: RE: [Vision2020] The Nation, 6/30/08
> >> >
> >> >> Kai wrote:
> >> >> "I would venture to hypothesize this:  If wealth were distributed
> > equally
> >> >> to
> >> >> every person, it would only be a matter of time before there would 
be
> > the
> >> >> "haves" and "have nots" once again."
> >> >>
> >> >> Good grief -- what do you mean "once again"?!?!  That's how things
> > are
> >> >> now
> >> >
> >> >> .
> >> >> . . hello!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Saundra Lund
> >> >> Moscow, ID
> >> >>
> >> >> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people
> > to do
> >> >> nothing.
> >> >> ~ Edmund Burke
> >> >>
> >> >> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2008 through
> > life
> >> >> plus
> >> >> 70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce
> >> >> outside
> >> >> the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the
> >> >> author.*****
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > Kai Eiselein
> >> > Editor, Latah Eagle
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Kai Eiselein
> >> Editor, Latah Eagle
> >>
> >> =======================================================
> >>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>                http://www.fsr.net
> >>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> =======================================================
> >>
> >
> >
> > "We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college
> > students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."
> >
> > - Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > This message was sent by First Step Internet.
> >           http://www.fsr.com/
> >
> >
> Kai Eiselein
> Editor, Latah Eagle 
> 


"We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college 
students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."

- Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)


---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/