31–40 of 457 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Where does he state that the poor did not earn their wages while the rich did? It seems to me he's saying that it is ok for everyone to keep their earnings across all income brackets.
The tax you pay doesn't belong to you and you didn't earn it - the law is very clear on this.
MLK was non-conformist. Aligning oneself with the hegemonic theories of the wealthy and powerful however, is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
His argument that Donald Trump would be a better choice for President than Hillary Clinton because the former would be easier to remove from office than the latter, arguing specifically that "congressional Republicans would [not] automatically spring to his defense, if he overstepped the line". Doesn't seem like a great example of keen political judgment in hindsight.
Depends on when this was said. 2015, there was a long list of republicans who didn't like Trump.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
His argument that Donald Trump would be a better choice for President than Hillary Clinton because the former would be easier to remove from office than the latter, arguing specifically that "congressional Republicans would [not] automatically spring to his defense, if he overstepped the line". Doesn't seem like a great example of keen political judgment in hindsight.
I've seen numerous examples of congressional Republicans not automatically springing to his defense
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I can't resist: - "charlatan": I understand reasonable people can disagree with his analyses and policy recommendations... but how does this add to the discussion? - "property law that benefits rich folks is magical and natural": this doesn't sound like Sowell? Also, I was under the impression that property law benefits everyone in a society like the U.S., who has more than precisely zero posessions...? - "...…
[flagged]
> “Too many academics write as if plain English is beneath their dignity,” Sowell once said, “and some seem to regard logic as an unconstitutional infringement of their freedom of speech.”
Sowell is unique in this respect. He's book, "Basic Economics" is full of extremely relatable examples of economics in practice. It's one of the few books on economics that's a great read regardless of your background or level of academic achievement.
In this time of ultra conformism and cancel culture. It is refreshing to read an articulate alternative view points. Sowell has an experience of with sides of the debate and brings that experience to his writing. I can't recommend him enough
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where does he state that the poor did not earn their wages while the rich did? It seems to me he's saying that it is ok for everyone to keep their earnings across all income brackets.
Saying that somebody's pre tax income is "their earnings" in the first place is precisely the problem. The tax you pay doesn't belong to you and you didn't earn it - the law is very clear on this.
"That's what the law says" is a lousy moral justification for something. There are plenty of unjust laws or just things that are not laws.