Rangelling with taxes!
Commentary, first drafted on Oct. 26, published on Nov. 3, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, we could easily accept the argument that it is better to spare the super-rich from new tax hikes, if the super-
rich only were to present themselves in such a way that would make them appear less super-rich than they
actually are. For too much is it ultimately the celebration of their own immense success which is re-enforcing the
poverty of the poor that they could now still hope to avoid being punished for that.
No, if we want to be honest here, we have to accept, that it is not primarily a lack of money that is keeping the
poor poor but that it is much rather a lack of hope which is maintaining them in their present state. And so we
should not neglect the discouraging effect that a self-indulging success celebration has on them. For too much
does the latter signal to the lost that their unestablished proposals won’t be fairly listened to, that they will now still
try to develop them.
No, no, if we do not want to lie to ourselves, we have to recognize that even the successful need to tout their
success to be able to believe in their own marketability. And so it is only logical that those who cannot show such
recognition stop expecting that they will ever be capable of receiving that. For too much does the glorification of
establishment suggest that outside of it a sense of welcome is not to be had that the disenfranchised would now
still want to fight for that.
Given therefore that is only circumstantial evidence that can motivate us to take a risk, we urge the super-rich to
do their best to counter the feudal temptations that success has brought to them. For too complacent would their
behaviour otherwise be that they could now still hope to spear themselves the tax hikes that we are currently
"rangelling" with.
Footnote 1: Now it is obvious that some people will argue against our assertion here that there is nothing wrong
with showing one’s success. After all, they will say, this success can only serve as in inspiration to those who have
not experienced it yet. And so it does not make sense to understate it now. For too little would one otherwise have
proven that everything is possible here, that one could now still trust that others will actually try to demonstrate
the same.
To those, however, who believe, that showing one’s success is still as innocent as it used be, we like to point out,
that the times have long passed by when men’s behaviour was just that. For too mirrored and mediatized has our
life become by now, that a human action could still be viewed for what it is.
No, if we do want to speak the truth here, we have to accept, that most of us have become our own marketing and
commercial entities. And so nothing that we do is without strategic PR considerations. For too much do we all
understand by now that our potential for success is largely based on our apparent credibility, that we could now
still help to instrumentalize that by working on a personal image campaign.
No, no, if we do not want to be coy with ourselves, we have to admit, that the world has become way too complex
and chaotic to go beyond circumstantial evidence valuations. And so even a charity donation is no longer as
selfless as it used to be. For so conscious and reflective has our public now become that we could now still avoid
manipulating that.
Given therefore that no self-indulging success celebration is primarily meant to be an inspiration for others but
much rather tries to enhance its own personal profile, Noah denkt™ strongly rejects the trickle-down argument
that an unabated sense of entitlement usually presents. For too dishonest is this theory towards itself, that one
could now still hope to be convincing now.
Footnote 2: By the way, there is a second group of sceptics who understand that innocence has long been lost in
our world. And so they prefer to build their counterargument on the notion that it is only legitimate for the rich and
wealthy to use their influence for self-promoting purposes. For too much, so they say, have these successful
worked for their success that they should not be able now to instrumentalize the latter.
To these people however, who believe that the market remains open and free even if the established adopt a self-
serving attitude therein, we would like to respond, that these wealthy would not have to be so self-indulgent if the
market were in deed as open as they claim. For too much could they in this case rely on the merit of their work
that they would now still have to loudmouth it for advertising purposes.
No, no, if we do not want to take it easy here, we have to recognize, that even the privileged cannot believe in
receiving a fair hearing without them touting their previous success. And so it is only reasonable that
disadvantaged do not sense the market openness that achievers tend to promise them. For too condescendingly
do they expect to be treated there that they could now still find the trust to confront that.
Given therefore that freedom is not as indiscriminate as it likes to see itself, we must ask the establishment to
show some restrain in exercising its well earned privileges. For too little would it else have done its share in
fighting poverty that it could now still hope to eradicate it.
Commentary, first drafted on Oct. 26, published on Nov. 3, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, we could easily accept the argument that it is better to spare the super-rich from new tax hikes, if the super-
rich only were to present themselves in such a way that would make them appear less super-rich than they
actually are. For too much is it ultimately the celebration of their own immense success which is re-enforcing the
poverty of the poor that they could now still hope to avoid being punished for that.
No, if we want to be honest here, we have to accept, that it is not primarily a lack of money that is keeping the
poor poor but that it is much rather a lack of hope which is maintaining them in their present state. And so we
should not neglect the discouraging effect that a self-indulging success celebration has on them. For too much
does the latter signal to the lost that their unestablished proposals won’t be fairly listened to, that they will now still
try to develop them.
No, no, if we do not want to lie to ourselves, we have to recognize that even the successful need to tout their
success to be able to believe in their own marketability. And so it is only logical that those who cannot show such
recognition stop expecting that they will ever be capable of receiving that. For too much does the glorification of
establishment suggest that outside of it a sense of welcome is not to be had that the disenfranchised would now
still want to fight for that.
Given therefore that is only circumstantial evidence that can motivate us to take a risk, we urge the super-rich to
do their best to counter the feudal temptations that success has brought to them. For too complacent would their
behaviour otherwise be that they could now still hope to spear themselves the tax hikes that we are currently
"rangelling" with.
Footnote 1: Now it is obvious that some people will argue against our assertion here that there is nothing wrong
with showing one’s success. After all, they will say, this success can only serve as in inspiration to those who have
not experienced it yet. And so it does not make sense to understate it now. For too little would one otherwise have
proven that everything is possible here, that one could now still trust that others will actually try to demonstrate
the same.
To those, however, who believe, that showing one’s success is still as innocent as it used be, we like to point out,
that the times have long passed by when men’s behaviour was just that. For too mirrored and mediatized has our
life become by now, that a human action could still be viewed for what it is.
No, if we do want to speak the truth here, we have to accept, that most of us have become our own marketing and
commercial entities. And so nothing that we do is without strategic PR considerations. For too much do we all
understand by now that our potential for success is largely based on our apparent credibility, that we could now
still help to instrumentalize that by working on a personal image campaign.
No, no, if we do not want to be coy with ourselves, we have to admit, that the world has become way too complex
and chaotic to go beyond circumstantial evidence valuations. And so even a charity donation is no longer as
selfless as it used to be. For so conscious and reflective has our public now become that we could now still avoid
manipulating that.
Given therefore that no self-indulging success celebration is primarily meant to be an inspiration for others but
much rather tries to enhance its own personal profile, Noah denkt™ strongly rejects the trickle-down argument
that an unabated sense of entitlement usually presents. For too dishonest is this theory towards itself, that one
could now still hope to be convincing now.
Footnote 2: By the way, there is a second group of sceptics who understand that innocence has long been lost in
our world. And so they prefer to build their counterargument on the notion that it is only legitimate for the rich and
wealthy to use their influence for self-promoting purposes. For too much, so they say, have these successful
worked for their success that they should not be able now to instrumentalize the latter.
To these people however, who believe that the market remains open and free even if the established adopt a self-
serving attitude therein, we would like to respond, that these wealthy would not have to be so self-indulgent if the
market were in deed as open as they claim. For too much could they in this case rely on the merit of their work
that they would now still have to loudmouth it for advertising purposes.
No, no, if we do not want to take it easy here, we have to recognize, that even the privileged cannot believe in
receiving a fair hearing without them touting their previous success. And so it is only reasonable that
disadvantaged do not sense the market openness that achievers tend to promise them. For too condescendingly
do they expect to be treated there that they could now still find the trust to confront that.
Given therefore that freedom is not as indiscriminate as it likes to see itself, we must ask the establishment to
show some restrain in exercising its well earned privileges. For too little would it else have done its share in
fighting poverty that it could now still hope to eradicate it.
| © Landei Selbstverlag, owned by Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards, Gerolstein, Germany. All rights reserved. Reminder: Noah denkt™ is a project of Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards and his Landei Selbstverlag (WL & his LSV). Consequently, all rights to the texts that have been published under the Noah denkt™brand name are reserved by WL & his LSV. The commentary and the reasoning that was provided on this page is for informational and/or educational purposes only and it is not intended to provide tax, legal or investment advice. It should therefore not be construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any security or any issuer by WL & his LSV or its Noah denkt™ Project. In fact, WL & his LSV encourage the user to understand that he alone is responsible for determining whether any investment, security or strategy is appropriate or suitable for him. And to leave no doubt as to what this means we urge our user to also note our extended Legal Notice. |
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Project for Philosophical Evaluations of the Economy |