Sunday, February 27, 2011

A world in which the majority could prevent the appearance of all that they did not like would be a stagnant and probably a declining world.

I propose for this reason we enact a regressive tax system. We should tax the poor and give hand outs to the rich. This would allow the rich the time they need and deserve to consume leisure time and invent new methods of relaxation. In the long run this would maximize societies utility. I do not know what social discount rate we would use but I am confident the growth in gross utility would surpass the discount rate so that is irrelevant. Just imagine all the new games, movies, toys and so forth would become. Well, we can't readily imagine or we would created them already. That is why we must buy the rich more leisure time so they can imagine them for us. Let the games begin!

1 comment:

  1. So yeah…Aaron I think you just made this post for shock value, or I sure hope you did. I think just because Hayek mentions that it is a not optimal for the majority to prevent the minority from seeking economic growth for all. This does not mean that we should place a regressive tax on the poor to get shiny new toys. I think that if I can take anything from this work it is very, very, simple something a child could learn. This is that coercion and trickery by force that intrudes on ones liberties is wrong and will prove to be destructive. I believe that a world where we taxed the poor and let the rich pay nothing would be both inefficient and unjust. It would be the presence of coercive actions by the government placing such a damper on society. I think that true productive innovation would stager, as the rich would get to fat and happy and have little incentive to add value to society. The entitlement that Wenzel mentions as a problem connected to how people think about their jobs wage would occur, but instead it would apply to class. We have had systems like you are advocating in the past (basically look at the classical example of a traditional monarchy). I so think that there would be intense social backlash and unrest to such a system in modern times (think of the French Revolution). I want to make it clear that I am not arguing for a progressive tax system either. I’m just pointing out that I don’t think Hayek would want his words taken in this direction as it is one which would support a coercive system.