I suppose the best answer is that one does not want to kill the ox, but that we may be willing to slow the ox down in the interest of fairness or distributive justice. There are trade-offs, and it may be argued that letting the economy run cooler is worth getting a 'better distribution' on the fruits of the economoy/ox.
I understand that you can just disagree and argue that some government/gun-based redistribution is inherently less fair and even counter productive. But the democratic pressure builds when you have a growing divide between the wealthiest few percent and the lower orders.
At the very least, without being totally collectivist, Americans have valued the idea of opportunity and fair play, so that one's life chances are not limited by one's humble birth. In particular, that means that poor children should have adequate health care and even a decent education, so that they can compete in a more Ayn Randian world, and that it is worth burdening the ox a little for that outcome.
Such seems to be the natural direction of democracies. I would be interested if you still support democracies as the best polities, but regret that they tend to be self-destructive as people cannot overcome this socialistic tendency.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-04-07 02:49 am (UTC)From:I suppose the best answer is that one does not want to kill the ox, but that we may be willing to slow the ox down in the interest of fairness or distributive justice. There are trade-offs, and it may be argued that letting the economy run cooler is worth getting a 'better distribution' on the fruits of the economoy/ox.
I understand that you can just disagree and argue that some government/gun-based redistribution is inherently less fair and even counter productive. But the democratic pressure builds when you have a growing divide between the wealthiest few percent and the lower orders.
At the very least, without being totally collectivist, Americans have valued the idea of opportunity and fair play, so that one's life chances are not limited by one's humble birth. In particular, that means that poor children should have adequate health care and even a decent education, so that they can compete in a more Ayn Randian world, and that it is worth burdening the ox a little for that outcome.
Such seems to be the natural direction of democracies. I would be interested if you still support democracies as the best polities, but regret that they tend to be self-destructive as people cannot overcome this socialistic tendency.