X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 	autolearn=unavailable version=3.2.2
Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE
Return-Path: <reeves-kalkman-errors &AElig umich.edu>
Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7O52ond021207 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) 	for <dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:02:50 -0400
Received: from anniehall.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.176.130]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7O52C71008420 	for <dreeves &AElig eecs.umich.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:02:22 -0400
Received: FROM newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	BY anniehall.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 46CE664A.AFFC5.17483 ;  	24 Aug 2007 01:02:02 -0400
Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (boston.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.61]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7O51Xki008348 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); 	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:01:33 -0400
Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7O51qnd021150 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); 	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:01:52 -0400
Received: from localhost (dreeves &AElig localhost) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) with ESMTP id l7O51pIV021147; 	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:01:51 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: boston.eecs.umich.edu: dreeves owned process doing -bs
X-X-Sender: dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu
In-Reply-To: <fb769dde0708231257k69d4bcefm17843d7ef4f3b4e9 &AElig mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708240025400.19265 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708200401310.19265 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>    <4CE28F9E-2B6E-4834-B3FA-1C3FBF2E7341 &AElig umich.edu>    <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708210236400.19265 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>    <02548635-1F0E-4244-847D-8FA54DACAD4B &AElig umich.edu>    <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708221628420.19265 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>    <1acf35a70708221835o75734aa2waa72f00b69632a18 &AElig mail.gmail.com>    <DDD7BFC1-6229-4625-9233-CF76FAE865A6 &AElig umich.edu>    <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708222319590.19265 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>    <ACFAAEAE-E9E6-4074-9166-C1C12977A2E5 &AElig umich.edu>    <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708231215240.13149 &AElig oshkosh.eecs.umich.edu>  <fb769dde0708231257k69d4bcefm17843d7ef4f3b4e9 &AElig mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on 	newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.1, clamav-milter version 0.91.1 on newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.1, clamav-milter version 0.91.1 on newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:01:51 -0400 (EDT)
To: Rob Felty <robfelty &AElig gmail.com>
cc: Kevin Lochner <klochner &AElig eecs.umich.edu>, Dave Morris <thecat &AElig umich.edu>,         improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu, Steven Reeves <steven &AElig aptigi.com>,         reeves-hayos &AElig umich.edu, reeves-kalkman &AElig umich.edu
From: Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>
Subject: Re: mind the gap
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 1048

> NASA, as a government agency, has the freedom to set goals 10 or 20
> years in the future. Would this be possible for a publicly-traded company? I
> would say no.

Yahoo has a world-class research lab in which scientists are paid to write 
academic papers.  That's pretty long-term thinking.

> I also agree with Kevin that taxing estates makes sense.

To the extent that it's necessary to forcibly [1] collect taxes from 
people, I would agree. But I don't view it as an intrinsically Good Thing 
to tell people who they can and can't give their stuff to.
   I don't buy the silver spoon argument for inheritance tax.  Agreed that 
it's a huge advantage to start life with a lot of money and parents, if 
they wanted to maximize fairness, would spread their money around to help 
other kids as well as their own.  But to force parents to do that?  I 
think lurking behind support for inheritance tax is, for some people (not 
many improvetheworlders), the Daddy Model of Wealth.
   Then again, better to be forced to do something when I'm dead than when 
I'm alive.  I think people should try to spend most of their money before 
they die anyway.

> I also agree with the point Eugene made about social welfare. If we give
> poor people some money for doing nothing, it tends to decrease crime and
> make everyone's lives more enjoyable, and is probably cheaper in the long
> run than not giving them anything, them turning into criminals, and then
> having to erect more jails. Theoretically, it is wrong to give people money
> for nothing, but practically, it seems like the better alternative.

Fair enough.  It's kind of like blackmail though.  "Give me stuff or I'll 
steal it."  But, yes, I'm enough of a pragmatist to be fine with a 
generous social safety net.

I agree that severance packages for CEOs are stupid.


[1] It doesn't seem forcible since we generally pay up peacefully.  But if 
you don't you're bodily hauled off to jail.

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

"I like work; it fascinates me. I can sit and
look at it for hours." -- Jerome K. Jerome