Why only seatbelts?

[Some Schmo]

Ajax, I can't help wondering what happened in your life to make you so determinedly misanthropic!

I was just sitting here after reading his last post, absolutely stunned, just not sure how to express my thoughts.

You summed it up perfectly.

[ajax18]

If you went to public school, society invested in you. Any time you use our benefit from things that were made possible using the pot we chipped into, you’ve benefited from society. The fact that you don’t live in complete isolation is strong evidence that you recognize the benefits you receive from society even though you hate to admit it.

My parents paid way more in taxes than our share of public education costs. There was no net investment in me.

[Lem]

Societies investment in me is close to zero. Just for future reference, I'm not responsible for providing roads and bridges for the other 350 million people in this country on my own. The only people that made any significant investment in me were my parents and perhaps my grandparents. American society has given me nothing that we didn't pay for in taxes many times more in value. Go ahead, show me your crazy accounting that says society made this huge investment in me.

It doesn’t take crazy accounting. You’re simply arbitrarily choosing whose move to count. It would be just as correct to say that 100% of the investment in you was made by Bill Gates. The fact is that we all throw money in the pot and then invest it in people. If you went to public school, society invested in you. Any time you use our benefit from things that were made possible using the pot we chipped into, you’ve benefited from society. The fact that you don’t live in complete isolation is strong evidence that you recognize the benefits you receive from society even though you hate to admit it.

Your ‘complete isolation’ comment is key. You mentioned public schools, to which the poster responded that his parents paid more than ‘their share.’ The fact that the schooling existed as a group effort means that paying ‘one’s share’ already means one benefitted more by the act of sharing, because it is highly unlikely that their ‘share’ could have been separated out and used to create a completely equivalent experience, provided solely by the parent.

Add in the roads we drive on, the police, fire, and EMT service, the bridges and traffic lights, sewer systems and water supply, streetlights and sidewalks, parks and recreation services, utilities and communication lines, oversight of food and medicinal preparation, libraries, museums, public medical care, banking support, etc. etc. etc., and there is no way that a person or family can singularly provide every bit of those benefits by themselves without sharing the burden for these public goods. To say “society’s investment in me is close to zero” is to ignore the vast infrastructure every person uses, virtually every minute of every day. It’s not an accurate assessment.

[Gunnar]

If you went to public school, society invested in you. Any time you use our benefit from things that were made possible using the pot we chipped into, you’ve benefited from society. The fact that you don’t live in complete isolation is strong evidence that you recognize the benefits you receive from society even though you hate to admit it.

My parents paid way more in taxes than our share of public education costs. There was no net investment in me.

In my experience, none are less likely to pull their own weight and contribute even as much as "their share" than those who are always obsessing and complaining over the prospect that they might somehow wind up contributing more than their share. Truly mature people don't act that way. They take pride in contributing what they can, without obsessing over whether someone else might not be contributing as much.

[ajax18]

Your ‘complete isolation’ comment is key. You mentioned public schools, to which the poster responded that his parents paid more than ‘their share.’ The fact that the schooling existed as a group effort means that paying ‘one’s share’ already means one benefitted more by the act of sharing, because it is highly unlikely that their ‘share’ could have been separated out and used to create a completely equivalent experience, provided solely by the parent.

Have you ever heard of a free market system? Do you think infrastructure and civilization didn't exist before Karl Marx?

[ajax18]

How selfish and inconsiderate of that peasant to foolishly die! Look at the labor he's now deprived from his lord. We must sock it to his heirs with an inheritance tax to make up for it.

[Themis]

Have you ever heard of a free market system? Do you think infrastructure and civilization didn't exist before Karl Marx?

Do we have any civilizations that did not collect some form of taxes?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Here we go again. Nothing. No amount of discussion will ever get Ajax to admit he’s benefiting from socialist policies, outside of what he can directly observe - which is money going into his pocket - and even then it’s just used to take a shot at socialism. Welcome to iteration #2347 of Groundjax Day.

- Doc

[Lem]

It doesn’t take crazy accounting. You’re simply arbitrarily choosing whose move to count. It would be just as correct to say that 100% of the investment in you was made by Bill Gates. The fact is that we all throw money in the pot and then invest it in people. If you went to public school, society invested in you. Any time you use our benefit from things that were made possible using the pot we chipped into, you’ve benefited from society. The fact that you don’t live in complete isolation is strong evidence that you recognize the benefits you receive from society even though you hate to admit it.

Your ‘complete isolation’ comment is key. You mentioned public schools, to which the poster responded that his parents paid more than ‘their share.’ The fact that the schooling existed as a group effort means that paying ‘one’s share’ already means one benefitted more by the act of sharing, because it is highly unlikely that their ‘share’ could have been separated out and used to create a completely equivalent experience, provided solely by the parent.

Add in the roads we drive on, the police, fire, and EMT service, the bridges and traffic lights, sewer systems and water supply, streetlights and sidewalks, parks and recreation services, utilities and communication lines, oversight of food and medicinal preparation, libraries, museums, public medical care, banking support, etc. etc. etc., and there is no way that a person or family can singularly provide every bit of those benefits by themselves without sharing the burden for these public goods. To say “society’s investment in me is close to zero” is to ignore the vast infrastructure every person uses, virtually every minute of every day. It’s not an accurate assessment.

Have you ever heard of a free market system? Do you think infrastructure and civilization didn't exist before Karl Marx?

My comment stands and you have said nothing to refute it. You can learn what is meant by public goods and how they are dealt with in the free market system in any basic Econ textbook.

[ajax18]

It turns out things aren't near as different today from Norman feudalism as we'd like to believe, except maybe the feudal lords offered a lower inheritance tax rate.