June 06, 2007

For Richer or for Poorer?


Is it better to steal from someone who is poor or someone who is rich?

4 comments:

JMC said...

Oh, definitely the poor, if they actually have something you want. Because they probably DON'T have an alarm system, and the cops will be less likely to help them, since they won't promise to buy tickets to the policemen's ball.

I realize you probably meant this as a morality question, but screw that - I don't want to get caught! ;)

Arcane Rest said...

if you are saying the same thing: the poor person because they probably stole it, since they couldn't afford it.

but if it was for value, it would have to be the rich person because his stuff would surely have more value when i turn it over to my fence.

Sabai said...

the moral of the story was hoping to be the posed question of: Why do we think we should have rich people pay more taxes when they use less social services just because they have the money to do so?

Steve said...

In that case it is because it is what works best. A "fair" system of everyone paying the same (dollar-wise, not percentage-wise) would only excerbate all of the social ills brought on by poverty, which is in and of itself a destabilizing force. Plus it is more compassionate, taking a portion of someone's discretionary income rather than that which would be going toward essentials. That's the reason even flat tax proposals usually say the first so many dollars of income aren't taxed.

Sometimes the fairest solution isn't the right one.