[throw10920]

And here we have a double demonstration of both stupid and malicious.

> If economy grows by roughly even percentage each year same should be true about government budgets

Stupid. For the purposes of this discussion, the government exists to provide services. The cost of those services, in general, decreases with economic productivity.

> Otherwise you just leave money on the table for billionaires to scoop up and sit on.

Both stupid and malicious. Mind-bogglingly stupid, because that profit isn't just captured by the wealthy, but by all economic classes. Malicious, because you'd rather sabotage the economy than let some people take excess profits based on their wealth alone.

[scotty79]

Government doesn't provide services. Government owns the land and the population simply by the fact of having army that can exert control. It provides monetary system you measure worth of everything in. You provide the service of producing economic value.

You can't with straight face claim that profit is not captured by billionaires but by everybody if economy grows 3% but billionaires wealth doubles in the same period. They not only capture the entire new profit of economy growth but also extract wealth from all other parties including government.

[throw10920]

> Government doesn't provide services.

Yet again, factually incorrect. The government provides many services - social security, food stamps, military protection, utilities, research funding, pharmaceutical oversight, and many, many, many other things. You're just wrong.

> You provide the service of producing economic value.

Also wrong. That is not a "service" provided to the government - it's just something that people do, and they have the right to keep those rewards.

> You can't with straight face claim that profit is not captured by billionaires but by everybody if economy grows 3% but billionaires wealth doubles in the same period

Those things are unrelated.

Yet again - a mixture between stupidity and malice, driven by base greed, envy, and resentment of what others have that you don't.

[scotty79]

> Yet again, factually incorrect. The government provides many services - social security, food stamps, military protection, utilities, research funding, pharmaceutical oversight, and many, many, many other things. You're just wrong.

Sorry for using a short-hand. Government doesn't provide services for your benefit. The only goal of providing those benefits is to best enable you to produce economic value that government and the rich can capture.

> That is not a "service" provided to the government - it's just something that people do, and they have the right to keep those rewards.

The only right of the physical world is might.

Why do you think anyone just lets people do what people "just" do? They let people do it because powerful benefit.

It's the same reasoning why a warlord lets peasants grow crops and raise animals and chases away neighboring warlord. Because then there's something he can take for himself. Political systems change but the basic mechanic never did. Democracy and capitalism are just a way better tool for exploitation than feudalism could ever be. Efficient. Stable. Didn't you ever notice that with development of new, more enlightened systems of power tax burden doesn't shrink but grows instead?

> Those things are unrelated.

We have one monetary system. It's all related.

> Yet again - a mixture between stupidity and malice, driven by base greed, envy, and resentment of what others have that you don't.

I have plenty, way more than I ever deserved. I'm at risk of being directly negatively financially affected by policies I advocate for. Drop the armchair moral psychoanalysis because you miss every time, on all counts.

[throw10920]

> The only right of the physical world is might.

Ok, you're just evil. No need to justify anything to an evil person.

[scotty79]

Wrong again. Being a realist doesn't make someone evil, but hell is paved with good intentions.

[throw10920]

> Being a realist

Factually incorrect. "The only right of the physical world is might." is not a realist statement, because being a realist is when you look at the factual truth of the world - it's a cynical worldview, which is non-truthful and therefore non-realist, by definition.

It's always entertaining to watch evil people try to justify their actions and (lack of) morality.