|
|
 Originally Posted by BananaStand
That's a trade-off. Low crime, and low recidivism rates are due to a lack of income inequality. Crime is a side effect of income inequality. If your argument is that wealth redistribution will reduce crime, fine, you'll get no argument from me. But I would argue that redistribution destroys the incentive to innovate and take risks. It diminishes the returns for excellence, therefore diminishing the drive toward excellence. It's no coincidence that 40+ of the top 50 hospitals in the world are in America. Who the fuck wants to become a Doctor in Norway if it means essentially living the same lifestyle as an insurance agent? So I would ask you, is that a fair trade-off for having less street crime?
idk, ask the doctors in norway. They seem to be doing fine. There are lots of studies about monetary incentives and productivity. General conclusion: not that important past a certain point. I don't think I'm just speaking for myself when I say: I'd much rather work in my field for minimum wage than as a cashier for twice my wage.
Also, you're forgetting the main reason for the prison system. It's not punishment nor is it rehabilitation. It's a deterrent.
So how's that working out for you guys? And no I did not forget that, it is immaterial to the point I was making.
I actually live in a state that collects 0 income or sales tax. Schools are still open. Roads and bridges are functional.
That's great. That's how it should be imo.
|