Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Talk about the statement that "proves too much." I'd take Club, or any lawyer for that matter, as likely doing better than average in a state of anarchy. But really that's not the baseline we're dealing with, is it?
Under your logic, any salary/earnings/income/benefits that are above average by "rights'" belong to the government. This is more fun with econ that Atticus's attempted slicing of my nutsack on friday.
|
No. This is not a zero-sum argument where the existence of government's protections justifies any taxation rates that the government wants.
Instead, I think Sidd's point is an allusion to
John Rawls' Veil of Ignorance theory that makes the argument for, among other things, progressive taxation.
Gattigap
