Karmic Accounting

[Royd 0]

Quote

if the entrepreneur fails then they get laid off - and usually quicker than the ceo.

(do you agree that the worst moochers are those who inherit and do nothing)

Hey, Lucky, how many handles do you have, on this website?

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

That's stupid. All jobs are not equal, which is why all jobs are not paid the same in the first place. Has the guy who sweeps the floor in the factory had the same input into wealth creation as the engineer who designed the production process?

The eye has said, to the foot.........

you're talking about fiat money payment for jobs in the market 'at the time'. are you saying that once the wealth has been created (you concede that even the guy who sweeps the factory floor has had a hand in its creation) it should be given unearned to family moochers?

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

if the entrepreneur fails then they get laid off - and usually quicker than the ceo.

(do you agree that the worst moochers are those who inherit and do nothing)

Hey, Lucky, how many handles do you have, on this website?

how 'bout you

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

how can a 'worker' be a 'moocher' - not easy
(unlike for rich kid moochers)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

how can a 'worker' be a 'moocher' - not easy
(unlike for rich kid moochers)

Phil Reardon didn't work at his brother's factory and the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

how can a 'worker' be a 'moocher' - not easy
(unlike for rich kid moochers)

Phil Reardon didn't work at his brother's factory.

a moocher then

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

how can a 'worker' be a 'moocher' - not easy
(unlike for rich kid moochers)

Phil Reardon didn't work at his brother's factory.

a moocher then

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!

you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher
(like many other rich kids)

As opposed to a 'worker' moocher?

how can a 'worker' be a 'moocher' - not easy
(unlike for rich kid moochers)

Phil Reardon didn't work at his brother's factory.

a moocher then

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

and the rich kid moochers (like phil reardon) who haven't even worked in the first place are, by your own logic, double moochers

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[Royd 0]

Quote

you're talking about fiat money payment for jobs in the market 'at the time'. are you saying that once the wealth has been created (you concede that even the guy who sweeps the factory floor has had a hand in its creation) it should be given unearned to family moochers?

I recognize that no company can operate, without acting as an entity. The problem with your concept and the whole concept of pure socialism is the inate human problem of selfishness, greed and entitlement.
How many times have I come up against a college educated superintentent, who couldn't match me, stroke for stroke, in the ability with my hands, or my mind, yet, because of a piece of paper, he was paid three times as much, and did a tenth of the work, and without me, he'd be on the street.
Shouldn't I be paid a portion of this man's salary, because, in reality, he's useless, without me. On the other hand, with a bit of training, I could do his job.

Here's the solution to your problem. Start your own business. And just for giggles, and the challenge, go out and hire union workers, to get the business off the ground. After all, they are all about fair distribution of the work.
At the end of the day, when it's all over, tell your kids, "Sorry, but you didn't do anything to make me rich."

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

you're talking about fiat money payment for jobs in the market 'at the time'. are you saying that once the wealth has been created (you concede that even the guy who sweeps the factory floor has had a hand in its creation) it should be given unearned to family moochers?

I recognize that no company can operate, without acting as an entity. The problem with your concept and the whole concept of pure socialism is the inate human problem of selfishness, greed and entitlement.
How many times have I come up against a college educated superintentent, who couldn't match me, stroke for stroke, in the ability with my hands, or my mind, yet, because of a piece of paper, he was paid three times as much, and did a tenth of the work, and without me, he'd be on the street.
Shouldn't I be paid a portion of this man's salary, because, in reality, he's useless, without me. On the other hand, with a bit of training, I could do his job.

Here's the solution to your problem. Start your own business. And just for giggles, and the challenge, go out and hire union workers, to get the business off the ground. After all, they are all about fair distribution of the work.
At the end of the day, when it's all over, tell your kids, "Sorry, but you didn't do anything to make me rich."

you concede then that the guy who sweeps the factory floor has had a hand in the creation of the wealth
(but not the moocher kids who inherit the wealth unearned)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

and the rich kid moochers (like phil reardon) who haven't even worked in the first place are, by your own logic, double moochers

Only if the money to start the business came solely from Hank Reardon. If family property was used to secure the loan for the startup money, then the entire family shares in the risk.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

and the rich kid moochers (like phil reardon) who haven't even worked in the first place are, by your own logic, double moochers

Only if the money to start the business came solely from Hank Reardon. If family property was used to secure the loan for the startup money, then the entire family shares in the risk.

i think you're saying phil reardon could have been a libertarian
(make up your mind)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

and the rich kid moochers (like phil reardon) who haven't even worked in the first place are, by your own logic, double moochers

Only if the money to start the business came solely from Hank Reardon. If family property was used to secure the loan for the startup money, then the entire family shares in the risk.

i think you're saying phil reardon could have been a libertarian
(make up your mind)

Incorrect. Again, I did not say that.

You have used two tactics to 'prove' that the family doesn't deserve any of the profit:

1. They (owner family members) don't work in the business. This is unproven, you just assume it is so. Of course, the same tactic can be used to say that the worker's *family* does not deserve any share of 'karmic profit', either - so how do you separate the two?

2. They (owner family members) have no risk. This is also incorrect, as quite often family businesses use family property as loan collateral - hence, the family DOES share in the risk.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

And the workers have ALREADY been compensated for their labor - more moochers.

and the rich kid moochers (like phil reardon) who haven't even worked in the first place are, by your own logic, double moochers

Only if the money to start the business came solely from Hank Reardon. If family property was used to secure the loan for the startup money, then the entire family shares in the risk.

i think you're saying phil reardon could have been a libertarian
(make up your mind)

Incorrect. Again, I did not say that.

You have used two tactics to 'prove' that the family doesn't deserve any of the profit:

1. They (owner family members) don't work in the business. This is unproven, you just assume it is so. Of course, the same tactic can be used to say that the worker's *family* does not deserve any share of 'karmic profit', either - so how do you separate the two?

family members who put the workhours into the business (presumably they're also being paid the market fiat rate) will receive their share of the 'karmic account'

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

You have used two tactics to 'prove' that the family doesn't deserve any of the profit.

you have this weird idea that libertarianism is about the 'family' - it isn't. libertarianism is about the individual and the contracts individuals make with other individuals. an entrepreneur has a contract with his/her workers and may or may not decide to implement a karmic accounting system. but what contract does an entrepreneur have with his/her children?

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Most libertarians believe individuals should have complete freedom of determination of their property's fate after death (once all open contracts have been settled). Therefore any degree of inheritance, disinheritance and bestowal to individuals or organisations of choice is permitted. They are against inheritance tax or compulsory inheritance. In their view, an individual may also have the right to retain some forms of ownership posthumously. In theory, land owners may also have the right to declare their land off-bounds to anyone for eternity, though consequentialist libertarians may reject this.

There is some debate among libertarians as to what should happen to property in absence of a will or a contract such as marriage. Some argue that "natural" heirs like family members, related by blood or otherwise, do not have an automatic right to inherit property of the deceased as they are as much subject to the principle of voluntary contracts as the rest of society. Instead, a deceased person's property would simply be declared as unclaimed property. The first individual to claim the property would then be its legitimate owner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_inheritance

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

How many times have I come up against a college educated superintentent, who couldn't match me, stroke for stroke, in the ability with my hands, or my mind, yet, because of a piece of paper, he was paid three times as much, and did a tenth of the work, and without me, he'd be on the street.

you sound like a bitter union guy here - if it bothers you, go earn that "piece of paper" like he did and stop crying about it.

9 of 10 times I've heard this flavor of gripe, the 'tech' bitching about the engineer has no clue as to the job duties of the engineer - he just 'thought' he did. But when he went home after his assigned hours, the eng was still working late after on his real job.

Mostly I've heard this gripe from mechanics in the airline industry though. I have no idea what they do. Seems unions breed bitterness and envy and abuse at all levels.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

you have this weird idea that libertarianism is about the 'family' - it isn't.

You have this wierd idea that libertarianism is about corporations acting in a certain way.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

you have this weird idea that libertarianism is about the 'family' - it isn't.

You have this wierd idea that libertarianism is about corporations acting in a certain way.

billvon is the one that likes corporations - but can't explain why they can mooch with state sanctioned 'limited liability'

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

Quote

Quote

you have this weird idea that libertarianism is about the 'family' - it isn't.

You have this wierd idea that libertarianism is about corporations acting in a certain way.

billvon is the one that likes corporations - but can't explain why they can mooch with state sanctioned 'limited liability'

I didn't mention liking them.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

DD - So I've looked at your position and I just don't see your point.

The owner can randomly pick anyone he likes to give away the farm to after his death. That's currently allowed now anyway - though most typically want to care for their offspring as motivation to excel.


who can he pick from?

1 - the Kids - who likely are paid to work at some other place or very well in family business

2 - the employees - who are are paid already to do their jobs

3 - odd strangers off the street - who are paid already to do their jobs

4 - friends and other acquaintances - same thing

ad nauseum


I see nowhere in here how anyone is more "deserving" than anyone else by your standards. Other than your bias to the kids for some unkown stereotype you maintain on it.

I certainly see how the kids are more deserving by anyone else's standards as they share the risk that "Dad" took in sacrificing the family assets to keep the business running.

In the end, the only positive I can see here is using this as a business practice to possibly attract better talent to the company - which most already do with stock gifts and options (essentially giving them part ownership now, not later).

The downside is clearly undermining motivation to even try to start a small or medium sized business.

I really think you just have an issue with inheiritence (spelling apologies there). There's little other reason for this concept.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Royd 0]

How many times have I come up against a college educated superintentent, who couldn't match me, stroke for stroke, in the ability with my hands, or my mind, yet, because of a piece of paper, he was paid three times as much, and did a tenth of the work, and without me, he'd be on the street.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

you sound like a bitter union guy here - if it bothers you, go earn that "piece of paper" like he did and stop crying about it.

9 of 10 times I've heard this flavor of gripe, the 'tech' bitching about the engineer has no clue as to the job duties of the engineer - he just 'thought' he did. But when he went home after his assigned hours, the eng was still working late after on his real job.

Mostly I've heard this gripe from mechanics in the airline industry though. I have no idea what they do. Seems unions breed bitterness and envy and abuse at all levels.

Sorry, but I despise the concept of the union...Especially, today's union mentality....I'm the man who never says can't or won't or don't.
Sadly, some of us, just have an inate ability to figure the angle of the dangle, without a college degree, but are restricted, due to regulations, mostly imposed by those who think that their field of expertise is so precious, they need to protect it.

[Jayruss 0]

Quote

Quote

"Karma" is just a PC word for Religion for those that want to believe in something extra, but can't admit it.
.
.
.
Inherited wealth may or may not be earned. I guess it depends on how hard you worked for your family prior to the time the old people died off. If I worked for the family business for 20-30 years, go to school for degrees targetted at running the business, and then inherited the business when the dad passes on. I'd be pretty upset at anyone saying I didn't earn that.
.
.
.
Wealth was earned (and taxed) by someone at some point, and since they earned it, they should decide what they do with it - spend it all, spend some and give the rest to the kids and grandkids, etc.

Except for pirates, and sock puppets, they are just GIVEN their gold.

if you worked in the family business then presumably you would have been paid at the time.

or if you had earned it you would have transferred ownership via stock transfers while the elder family member was alive avoiding inheritance.

__________________________________________________
"Beware how you take away hope from another human being."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

[billvon 2,400]

>billvon is the one that likes corporations - but can't explain why they can
> mooch with state sanctioned 'limited liability'

I like good corporations and dislike bad ones. Both corporations and people can mooch, and both can limit their liability. (Google "personal bankruptcy.") I recall one skydiver who got a few credit cards and maxed them out buying gear (two rigs!) and jumps before declaring bankruptcy. He felt that since he had just gotten his SL jumpmaster rating he could justify them as a 'necessary business expense.'