> Eeyore wrote:
> > > Jim Thomps>
> > >>The ultimate solution to "fairness"...
>
> > > Oh dear, the Alzheimer's is kicking in again ....
>
> > > " Obama is a leveler. He has come to narrow the divide between rich and
poor. "
> > > Given the vast differences, do you really see a problem with that ? Over
the last
> > decade or so, both in the US and UK the rich have got vastly richer, the
poor
> > have got a lot poorer and the middle class are struggling. Is that fair ?
>
> > Ain't nuttin' fair...
> > In America, one is supposed to be free to try, to be free to succeed,
> > but not forced to be "equal".
>
> No-one forcing you to be equal but I just read in the papers that Mel
Gibson's getting
divorced. No pre-nup so his wife is in for half the estate valued at ~ $500
million or
therabouts. I mean, what can you do with that much money that a tenth of it
wouldn't
keep you happy ? I'd be quite pleased with 1% !
>
> Graham
You've got to factor in how many rich people there are, and how they got there.
Most of the rich's recent leap forward comes from a few exceptional individuals getting especially outrageous paychecks. That means certain CEOs and mortgage-bubble bonus recipients particularly, some sports stars, entertainers, and Al Gore.
Would you treat a factory-owner's return on 20 years' investment the same as a Freddie Mac executive's bonus? Would that be fair? Or good for society?
Cheers, James Arthur