Do we have the right to tax people in order to help the poor?

[Skip]

You and Ned are the ones who brought up historic wrongs - why bring it up if not to punish someone? Even if the word you use is not 'punish?'

The word Ned used was help. I recommend repairs to a system that's not working. You want justice.
If you read all those words as "punish", you're doomed.

[Obvious Leo]

I think change will come faster than we think and almost certainly change will come faster than we're ready for, if history is to be our judge. There is an inherent anarchy in the ubiquity and power of the internet, especially as it is expressed through social media and now that this genie is out of the bottle it can never be stuffed back in. Obviously such a power can be used for good or ill but already we have seen rapid change as a result. I cite the "Arab spring" and ISIS as examples of situations where oppressed people rise up in an inappropriate way but there are more finely nuanced examples where the last decade or so has seen many societies move forward in a more positive direction. The "Occupy Wall St" movement failed but it's not going to simply go away. Almost all western nations have finally come to realise that the "war on drugs" was a war they were always destined to lose. Substance abuse is finally being seen as a health problem rather than a crime problem because to treat it as a crime problem simply generates crime. Who would have thought that Ireland, that most religiously oppressed of all European nations, would be the first to sanction same-sex marriage by overwhelming popular referendum. Attitudes to climate change are changing rapidly and the voice of science is finally being heard. We are slowly becoming less and less of a consumption driven society. There are literally dozens of such examples and more are emerging all the time.

Our world is changing rapidly and many of these changes are in the right direction. However we have unleashed a powerful force and powerful forces can also be extremely dangerous because entrenched elites have never been known to give up their power without a fight. I'm an old fart who won't get to see how the story unfolds but my children and grandchildren are cursed to live in interesting times. As a lifelong anarcho-contrarian I'm glad of it.

[henry quirk]

"fix"

Here's a novel idea: let each and every one mind his or her own business.

Let each and every one keep his or her hands to him- or her-self.

Make that happen, work towards that, and the bulk of 'problems' will evaporate like a (small) puddle under a mid-day sun.

But, then: what will all the busy-bodies, the finger waggers, the meddlers, do with themselves? What will the micromanagers, the compassionate, the holier than me and you, do? How will these great humanitarians (nosey parkers) occupy themselves?

Could they, would they, turn their vast, cool, intellects inward? Perhaps self-interrogate? Mebbe work on their root (tend to their own gardens)?

Nah...humanity is the problem, not 'them', and they won't stop till the slaughterhouses run red with the vitality of any one, every one, who sez 'I don't wanna walk your road, I wanna walk mine'.

Be the gatekeeper of your own head, watch your back, beware of those who'd direct you 'for your own good'.

[Skip]

I can't see 11 billion people each having his or her own little patch of planet to mind, without some overlap, commerce and co-operation. Too bad it also means conflict. But henry quirk can hold his turf against 10999999999999 other people, so that's cool. I'm certainly prepared to mind my own business and look the other way when they come for his stuff.

[Obvious Leo]

I don't need to worry too much about the hordes of "them" coming for my "stuff", Skip, but since I haven't locked my house in 30 years "they" wouldn't find it all that difficult. However "they" would be rather disappointed at the meagre pickings to be had because I live like a hermit monk. My wife and I would both describe ourselves as uber-minimalists whose possessions are more of a burden than a blessing. "Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people.

[thedoc]

My wife and I would both describe ourselves as uber-minimalists whose possessions are more of a burden than a blessing. "Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people.

If I want to make some music by learning some pieces and playing them on a piano, is that piano a burden of unnecessary "stuff" that indicates what an immature and needy person I am?

[thedoc]

I know a person who plays and teaches the flute. One of her mouthpieces, (not the whole flute) cost several hundred dollars, is that conspicuous consumption, indicating again what a needy and immature person she is?

[Obvious Leo]

My wife and I would both describe ourselves as uber-minimalists whose possessions are more of a burden than a blessing. "Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people.

If I want to make some music by learning some pieces and playing them on a piano, is that piano a burden of unnecessary "stuff" that indicates what an immature and needy person I am?

Absolutely not, doc. I have a piano myself, as well as a few other musical instruments, and I regard them as critical pieces of infrastructure in my life. I also have a vast library of books that I couldn't bear to part with. I was more trying to make the point that many people seem to mindlessly acquire possessions which they truly don't seem to value and these possessions introduce a lot of unnecessary clutter into their lives. It was really just an observation from personal experience rather than an attempt to instruct other people how to live their lives. I'd never regard myself as qualified to do that.

[thedoc]

My wife and I would both describe ourselves as uber-minimalists whose possessions are more of a burden than a blessing. "Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people.

If I want to make some music by learning some pieces and playing them on a piano, is that piano a burden of unnecessary "stuff" that indicates what an immature and needy person I am?

Absolutely not, doc. I have a piano myself, as well as a few other musical instruments, and I regard them as critical pieces of infrastructure in my life. I also have a vast library of books that I couldn't bear to part with. I was more trying to make the point that many people seem to mindlessly acquire possessions which they truly don't seem to value and these possessions introduce a lot of unnecessary clutter into their lives. It was really just an observation from personal experience rather than an attempt to instruct other people how to live their lives. I'd never regard myself as qualified to do that.

I really didn't think that was what you meant, but I wanted to be very careful in my thinking. In Dec. '09 my wife and I got to start over again from scratch, and we decided that in our new house we were only going to have the things we really needed or wanted. As a result our living area is very large and open and clear of clutter, in fact we had 2 baby grand pianos in our living room with plenty of room to spare. A Sohmer model 57 and a Baldwin model R, the Sohmer has since been removed to our new church, we were storing it for the congregation. Nov. '11 was the first time in 40 years that I had a piano in the house that I could use, it's been a bit of catch up.

[Obvious Leo]

Just out of curiosity. Do you find that a more minimalist approach to life with respect to your possessions is less stressful? My wife and I went through a similar re-scheduling of priorities when our youngest bloke left home about 12 years ago and now both agree that less is more. Over a period of decades you just seem to collect more and more crap until you just reach the point where you start wondering what on earth you're doing with all that stuff. In our own case I think it was more a case of laissez-faire laziness than neediness but I found it cathartic to de-clutter.

[Wyman]

I don't need to worry too much about the hordes of "them" coming for my "stuff", Skip, but since I haven't locked my house in 30 years "they" wouldn't find it all that difficult. However "they" would be rather disappointed at the meagre pickings to be had because I live like a hermit monk. My wife and I would both describe ourselves as uber-minimalists whose possessions are more of a burden than a blessing. "Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people.

Ditto

[Wyman]

So who should be punished - the perpetrators, their kin, those of their race?

Nobody needs to be punished. Punishing has been the bane of civilization. Punishing the poor for being poor, and then punishing them more for resenting it, and then punishing them more for resisting the punishments, and so forth, is the cycle that usually ends in bloody revolutions, after which the winners set about punishing whoever they're angry with, and thus destroying even more of their society.

What you need to do is far more difficult. You need to look at the situation as it is at this moment in time, figure out what infrastructure needs to be repaired, what agencies need to be empowered, what political, judiciary and economic establishments need to be reformed, what mechanisms aren't performing their functions and dismantle those, what needs building, who needs healing, what power and privilege needs curtailing, what waste of resources need plugging, what corruption needs excising.

Figure out what it needs to fix your society, and do that. Even if it means not hurting anybody.

I call taking wealth away from someone based on past misdeeds (real or perceived) of their ancestors punishing them.

what power and privilege needs curtailing,

That's the punishment, buried in pseudo-intellectual terms. For I take it that you and those whose ideas you approve of would be deciding what needed to be curtailed and what the curtailing consists of. Otherwise, you would be satisfied with the democratic process of whichever country it is that you've chosen for a home (assuming as I do that it is a democracy).

Also, I don't 'need' to do anything. All people like me and Henry Quirk (I think) are asking for is to be left alone and not be told what we need to do. If you want reforms, then reform your country. We'll decide what we 'need to do' and proceed from there.

[Skip]

No problem. I'm happy to leave the two of you alone.

[thedoc]

Just out of curiosity. Do you find that a more minimalist approach to life with respect to your possessions is less stressful? My wife and I went through a similar re-scheduling of priorities when our youngest bloke left home about 12 years ago and now both agree that less is more. Over a period of decades you just seem to collect more and more crap until you just reach the point where you start wondering what on earth you're doing with all that stuff. In our own case I think it was more a case of laissez-faire laziness than neediness but I found it cathartic to de-clutter.

In the old house we had accumulated a lot of stuff because both my wife and I were pack rats, as in "I'm sure I'll have a use for this, someday". Then my father died in '01 and I got part of the stuff that he had collected, and he was worse than I was. In '98 I started selling stuff on EBay, but once people found out, they were donating all kinds of stuff for me to sell, and I was finding "bargains" at yard sales to put on the auction. I'm still listing on EBay, but I'm much more careful what I acquire so that I have a better chance of selling it.

[henry quirk]

"11 billion people"

Make that seven billion.

#

"co-operation"

I'm all for two or more folks of like-mind and/or -agenda pooling resources and/or working together to reach a goal or goals. Got a significant problem, however, with know-nuthin's dictating that I 'should' or 'shouldn't' (especially when those know-nuthin's wield the big stick of 'law').

#

"...come for his stuff."

Let 'em come.

##

""Stuff" is only for immature and psychologically needy people."

Depends on your definition of 'stuff'.

##

"All people like me and Henry Quirk (I think) are asking for is to be left alone and not be told what we need to do."

Yes. As I assess the world and myself in the world, I find only one person competent to 'govern' me, and that's 'me'.

I don't need directing, educating, shaming, insulating, enlightening, cajoling, etc.

I don't need 'governors' or leaders.

I need proxies, public servants.

##

"I'm happy to leave the two of you alone."

Mebbe so...whole whack of other folks who won't, though (who simply 'can't').