Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> in article calq3e$lp5$2@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/15/04 12:23 PM:

>> Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>>> in article calmvr$js6$2@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
>>> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/15/04 11:30 AM:
>> 
>>> And why is flattening it not a good thing?
>> 
>> I actually don't recall placing a value judgement on it.
>> 
>> Could you find that post for me, please?
>> 
>> I DO recall saying that the very rich benefit disproportionately from
>> government services, but that's not quite the same thing, is it, Mr
>> Schaal?

> Let me get this right. 

I made a simple declarative statement.

Bozos identifying themselves with political parties (the good Mssrs
Williams and Gerry) then each decided that a simple declarative sentence
was an obviously misleading statement espousing the very opposite
viewpoint they themselves held, which is opposite to each other's view,
as it turns out. Thus, each is saying I am trumpetting the stance of the
other.

Whacky.

> As to your statement that the very rich benefit disproportionately from
> government services, that is true only if one views the benefit on a per
> capita basis.

> For instance, Bill Gates receives a lot more government services than a
> person who is among the working poor, but the ratio of government services
> received to taxes collected would be a lot smaller than for the working
> poor.

In order to protect his wealth, he requires roads, an education system
(for him to acquire educated workers), large-scale and long-term stability
(fiscal and political), interaction with other stable corporate and
political entities, armed protection of a vast array of assets (police,
armed forces, various government agencies looking into misuse of his
funds by those trusted by him to invest them), building regulators to 
ensure that someone doesn't build a polyamine-extraction facility upwind
from his very expensive abode, etc.

The very poor require a check-cashing service to "protect" their wealth.
The government services they recieve are more along the lines of
survival based, and their existence benefits Mr Gates greatly by keeping
them from getting too restive and desparate and doing to Mr Gates what
people have historically done to those they perceive (rightly or
wrongly) as taking advantage of an unfair system.

In sum, Mr Gates benefits from almost ALL government services, whether a
check is handed to him or not.

Mike