=0A

I drafted most of&n= bsp;a note just like Kevin's Friday night, and found that Kevin had ef= fectively completed it Saturday. Specifically, with the same idea tha= t I could bring the discussion to some conclusion, though I no longer think= that this is possible. However, I think there is still a lot of= polite, inadvertent straw-manning in these arguments (see Kevin being = ;right again with his note today). James' last lines were the key to = my understanding:

=0A

"A new unit of wealth ma= y
eventually produce dividends for everyone, but that is not what we're=
debating. We're debating whether your wealth generation can negatively=
impact my wealth generation, and the answer is yes."

=0A

&nbs= p;

=0A

...and I think that these words are entirely consisten= t with this statement: Generating wealth (producing a good or service) does= not hurt any one. If the new product or service is produced more eff= iciently or is more desirable than the other products on the mark= et, it may change the conditions that other people had been previously = ;exploiting to create wealth. But, it does not negatively impact = ;another person's current wealth.

=0A

=0A<= DIV>The future is not guaranteed, and people who work to think about what t= he world will want tomorrow should be rewarded for helping us all be prepar= ed. People who make more desirable goods with less desirable raw mate= rials should also be rewarded for their efficiency. Contributing more= goods or services to society may allow one person to trade their= goods for a disproportionate amount of gold, green paper, or fancy cars; b= ut it does not negate all the goods and services they previously provided.<= /DIV>=0A

=0A

A separate issue discussed is how unequal = access to resources can lead to unfairness in wealth. This is obvious= to all, however, we shouldn't confuse equal resources with equal= access to resources. Just because the ethanol producers are taking m= ore corn, doesn't mean that the beef producers didn't have an equal opportu= nity to have purchased that corn to do something less efficient with i= t. Now, they'll hopefully have equal opportunity to invest their= resources in an ethanol distillery.

=0A

= =0A

This is why I believe in equal opportunity, not equal assets n= or equal "ends." This would require a government that works to e= nsure equal access to resources (not infinite nor absolute access= ), very high inheritance taxes, low income taxes, low sales tax, free = access to a good education for children of all income levels, free access t= o trade your goods and services, property tax rates that essentially turn o= ver a corporation's land rights over the lifespan of the average investor, = etcetera.

=0A

Thanks,

= =0A

Cameron