From: s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 16:12:02 +0800
To: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Subject: Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
In-Reply-To: <01I43B16HT2U8Y53CU@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9604282225.B28833-0100000@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

> From:	IN%"s1113645@tesla.cc.uottawa.ca" 28-APR-1996 19:36:41.10
> 
> >What is interesting is how it applies to the middle-class, where most of 
> >the tax-base is. 
> 
> 	Currently, yes... but the divide between rich and poor is growing.
> (So long as this divide is determined by merit, and the poor still have enough
> to survive, I'd call this a good trend. So would various other people on this
> list, perhaps without my caveats.) In other words, the middle class is going
I agree with your caveat. It's where the anarchists get me skeptical.

> up or down. The factory workers are going down; the high-ability workers
> (including information workers) are going up. So just talking about the rich
> makes sense.

Someone sent me some US income tax figures. It would seem that the vast
majority of personal taxes are paid by the rich and high-end upper-middle.
So I'll eat my words and agree with you, talking about the rich makes
quite a bit of sense. I sort of do wonder how many of those "corporations"
are small businesses and individuals working as companies. Time for me to
go find a national stats book. 

Of course only talking about the rich makes things so much easier.