On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Robert Hansen <email@example.com> wrote: > > On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:05 PM, Paul Tanner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > No. I do not see what you mean. There are many reasons why people are > where they are or in the jobs they have or whatever - family, friends, > climate, geography, congestion, etc. Money is the not the only thing. > Get real. > > > See, that is what I am talking about.
??? You try to get away with condemning me as a hypocrite for not living as if money is the only thing, and you say this?
And you need to explain why you think that anything you've said so far in any way negates what I said in my post in this thread
and in all the links I gave in that post, since nothing of what you've said negates it in any way.
And here's some algebra showing that your conservative claim that people are better off in what economists a low-value-added economy like Mississippi than in what economists call a high-value-added economy like New York state:
If I in New York state make twice as much as you in Mississippi and even if if my basic cost of living (basic necessities) on absolute all necessary items were twice as high as yours (but it never is, since I would not pay twice as much on the same national brand of toothpaste or whatever especially at the same national retailer), I still have more purchasing power than you, even with a higher tax rate. That is, by the distributive property, I have twice as much money as you left over after basic living expenses before taxes, and after taxes because of a higher tax rate somewhat less than twice as much money left over than you.
And this almost twice as much money would buy much more than what you have left over. That is, you would be wrong to try to argue that *everything* I could possibly buy would be twice as expensive as you - for many items, the price would be the same or close to the same. For example, when buying clothing or any other consumer item you can think of - vitamins, TV sets, stereo systems, whatever - out of catalogs or online from the big national sales companies like Sears, you and I pay the same price. And this same price phenomenon holds when you go into these stores themselves in New York state vs Mississippi - they have to, since charging me in New York twice as much money for the same item I can buy online for half that price would put their stores in New York state out of business. That is, the phenomenon of mail order and now online buying causes these companies to charge a national price that is essentially what people in the poorest states can afford.
Therefore it is proved via the distributive property of algebra that one really is better off making more money at one's job even in a higher cost of living situation.
So what? It negates nothing of what I said in that post above and in all the links given. Nothing. That is, you will always find that people will never be satisfied even if they have created more per capita wealth and prosperity than anyone else.
Oh? You argue the silliness and nonsense that the fact of human nature that people will never be satisfied is an argument against the fact that Norway has created more per capita wealth and prosperity than anyone else?