|
|
 Originally Posted by OngBonga
That's the way it works. You're a poker player, if you win some fucker else loses. That's the way it works, the principle is the same... we're competing for resources. You invest your money, or labour, in an effort to compete, and you either win or lose.
This is all true but sort of misses my point.
If two football players are both working their ass off to make the top league, and Person A has the genetic talent to be a professional athlete and Person B has almost but not quite enough genetic talent, they've both worked equally hard and arguably deserve the same reward. Rewarding one with £3m a year while the other has to go look for a real job that might pay £30k a year is what strikes me as unfair. Ok fine, capitalism and all that, but it's hard to believe anything except person A's genes are being rewarded out of all proportion to what he 'earned' by being born lucky. Person A did not do anything differently from Person B, so letting A earn 100x the salary of B is unjustified imo.
Now if we add in person C who genetically never had a chance in hell of making £3m a year at anything, it becomes easier to accept the idea that just maybe A should be paying more taxes than B or C.
|
Reply With Quote