| Final-Fan said: P.S. Your discussion of the specific example implies to me that you DISAGREE with the statement "But the first amounts of income after paying for basic necessities improve the quality of life much more than an equal increase (even percentage increase) does for already high income". BUT PLEASE CONFIRM OR DENY THIS EXPLICITLY. |
Lets go with the 1 argument at a time format. I remembered how eaisly that made things last time. (Well easier.)
I do deny it. Based on the fact that people have different levels of "needs" and the like.
For example, you've got a poor person, a middle class person and a rich person.
To a poor person, a trip to Disney world would be amazing, to a middle class person, a trip to Disney world would be great, though somewhat expected, maybe they go every once in a while. To a rich person... it's downright boring. Probably.
Now if you want to talk about some sort of tax credits for things that improve your life in specific like say college. Then that I could understand. After all, this stuff usually pays off... and is good for the country as a whole.
But when you compare like say... the money someone would use to buy a videogame system. Vs the money someone else might use for their third system... you can't judge that stuff.
The main problem I have is your trying to attach different values to the same amount of money. You are trying to make one 20 10, and another 20 30.
When money at is definition is what we use to define what things are worth.
Give someone the choice between a college education, and a second house worth more then the college education, and people will take the house 9 times out of 10.
When you compare it your way... basically everything the rich person has that is above what the poorer person has isn't as important combined as what the poorer person has.
I mean... what's more important? Someones second TV, or a persons third plasma TV, a Yacht, Private Jet, Backpark Amusement Park, 3 Videogame systems, and the Dallas Cowboys?
In that regard, the person with Two TVs is always going to be less then the person with 3 TVs + because they are going to have less entertainment.
