Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
From: IN%"s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca" 28-APR-1996 19:36:41.10
What is interesting is how it applies to the middle-class, where most of the tax-base is.
Currently, yes... but the divide between rich and poor is growing. (So long as this divide is determined by merit, and the poor still have enough to survive, I'd call this a good trend. So would various other people on this list, perhaps without my caveats.) In other words, the middle class is going up or down. The factory workers are going down; the high-ability workers (including information workers) are going up. So just talking about the rich makes sense. -Allen
On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:
From: IN%"s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca" 28-APR-1996 19:36:41.10
What is interesting is how it applies to the middle-class, where most of the tax-base is.
Currently, yes... but the divide between rich and poor is growing. (So long as this divide is determined by merit, and the poor still have enough to survive, I'd call this a good trend. So would various other people on this list, perhaps without my caveats.) In other words, the middle class is going I agree with your caveat. It's where the anarchists get me skeptical.
up or down. The factory workers are going down; the high-ability workers (including information workers) are going up. So just talking about the rich makes sense.
Someone sent me some US income tax figures. It would seem that the vast majority of personal taxes are paid by the rich and high-end upper-middle. So I'll eat my words and agree with you, talking about the rich makes quite a bit of sense. I sort of do wonder how many of those "corporations" are small businesses and individuals working as companies. Time for me to go find a national stats book. Of course only talking about the rich makes things so much easier.
participants (2)
-
E. ALLEN SMITH -
s1113645＠tesla.cc.uottawa.ca