Originally Posted by sperbonzo

Of course he should be "allowed". Why should someone be "allowed" to confiscate his property by force when the value that he has created happened because he provided benefit to others? The whole point of a voluntary transaction in a free market, is that both parties must see a benefit in it, or that transaction does not occur. You have to feel that the labor entailed in generated $300 is not worth as much to you, as the new Ipad, and Apple must feel that the Ipad is not worth as much to them as your $300. Therefore, in order to generate a great amount of wealth, someone must provide a great deal of value, to a large number of people. They are providing benefit to the people around them in what they are doing, or they do not sell a lot of what they make, and they do not become wealthy. (Obviously this allows applies to services as well as products).

Having the government take from your neighbors, by force, value that they have earned by providing goods or services to those around them does not make you a good person, it just means that you are a thief who wants the government to do your dirty work for you.


.