Re: SV: Knight and Public Domain

[don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>]

> From: don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: SV: Knight and Public Domain
> To: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
> Date: Friday, May 16, 2008, 8:51 AM
> -- On Fri, 5/16/08, David Marjanovic
> <david.marjanovic@gmx.at> wrote:
> 
> > From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
> > Subject: Re: SV: Knight and Public Domain
> > To: "DML" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
> > Date: Friday, May 16, 2008, 8:24 AM
> > > Absolutely! Bottom line case, we are talking
> about
> > depriving people of the 
> > > ability to feed and care for their children (or
> > designated heirs); sooner 
> > > is more egregious than later, relative to the
> > confiscation of property, 
> > > whether before or after death.
> > 
> > So it seems what we're really talking about is
> social
> > policy: is it a good 
> > thing that large fortunes can be inherited, or should
> there
> > be an 
> > inheritance tax that puts a cap on things, puts
> everyone on
> > a more or less 
> > equal footing (within an order of magnitude or perhaps
> > two), and rewards 
> > _becoming_ rich (a process which tends to create jobs
> and
> > produce increasing 
> > tax revenue) over _being_ rich? Bill Gates famously
> favors
> > the latter 
> > position: he has said he wants his heirs to be
> well-off but
> > not so rich they 
> > don't need to do anything anymore...
> > 
> > I think we'll have to take this offlist...
 
Well, I think most artists would be very surprised (and
thrilled) to find out "large fortunes" have
anything to do w/ it; and NOT thrilled to know this is
"social policy", rather than "property rights"... but 'tis ot indeed, and I 
have said my piece.

Don