Jul 17, 2012 5:04 PM GMT
Fortunately my thread that began posing the question of who on RJ has a net worth of at least $2.5 MM has taken on a life of its' own. With luck, this thread will move discussion in a slightly different direction, but that is for our RJ "democracy" to decide.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that one can own wealth in whatever form it may take in excess. I say "own" because one's possessions in whatever form they take are fundamentally protected as to ownership in America's foundational documents, i.e. the U.S. Constitution, etc.
This is of course not unique to America, but is an intrinsic element of all democracies even though I wonder about this precept in regards to the Greeks, Portuguese, Italians, and French. Let's of course not leave out the Swedes, even though you will find there are no free rides in Sweden as there are in the U.S., ergo fifty-percent or so of Americans do not pay their fair share of the federal tax burden; instead they receive welfare in the form of refundable credits.
Let's say a small group of individuals both via personal work and effort and inheritance stretches across the globe and controls many billions in assets. What should be the cap on wealth controlled by an individual or small group? Should in Randian fashion prior to collapse, these assets be reallocated to others, even though they lack the skills to manage said assets?
For the sake of argument, let's assume that one can own wealth in whatever form it may take in excess. I say "own" because one's possessions in whatever form they take are fundamentally protected as to ownership in America's foundational documents, i.e. the U.S. Constitution, etc.
This is of course not unique to America, but is an intrinsic element of all democracies even though I wonder about this precept in regards to the Greeks, Portuguese, Italians, and French. Let's of course not leave out the Swedes, even though you will find there are no free rides in Sweden as there are in the U.S., ergo fifty-percent or so of Americans do not pay their fair share of the federal tax burden; instead they receive welfare in the form of refundable credits.
Let's say a small group of individuals both via personal work and effort and inheritance stretches across the globe and controls many billions in assets. What should be the cap on wealth controlled by an individual or small group? Should in Randian fashion prior to collapse, these assets be reallocated to others, even though they lack the skills to manage said assets?
