Tax the 1%...

1) Effort, in 99% of situations. If you're resorting to contexts dependent upon talent (ie the Arts), you lose in spectacular fashion. The vast majority are not in those fields. Even where talent matters somewhat, it's nothing without effort. We've all met talented people who got nowhere, and we can almost always see exactly why. Often a result of being unwilling to compromise, or do the hard yards of developing their talent in marketable ways. Or simply being unable to accept that their talent isn't enough, and that they need to move on to something more lucrative.

PS: If you're a Chef and still produce rubbish food after years of training and work, then you have chosen not to do the work needed to match talent. Or you have talent and failed to do the hard work needed to back it up.

2) Private property removes nothing from anyone. You're free to own as much or as little as you see fit. No permission needed. Total freedom of choice.

3) Effort is the only criterion for reward .. outside of lotteries and inheritances. I spent 20+ years living like a pauper to have the financial security I have today - because I was not born to money, and never earned enough to do otherwise. Point is, the greatest effort was expended not in working for the man, but in the discipline of living like a pauper. That's the big effort. And that's the effort you cannot get from even a quarter of First Worlders, much less the totality you imagine. People will simply not do it. No matter how much you give them, they will find a way to avoid putting it towards future security. In trying to carry such people, you rob the truly needy AND create even more future poverty. That's a b@stard move.

 

Garbage with no basis in fact. You obviously have no experience in business.

No. That is false. I win, have won, and will always win against you, and you will always lose, because I am stating facts of objective physical reality and their logical implications, while you are merely announcing your unfounded religious beliefs that are contrary to fact.

Majority of what? What on earth do you even erroneously imagine you think you might be talking about?

Affirming the consequent fallacy. Effort -- even minimal effort -- being a necessary condition for reward does not make it a sufficient condition, let alone the only condition as you claim. You just don't know enough logic to understand that -- and on form, you will never be learning enough.

So what? We have also all met people who devoted great effort to their projects yet got no reward, which proves your claim is objectively false. OBJECTIVELY.

People who put in lots of effort may also be unwilling to compromise and consequently fail to obtain any reward, which also proves your claim is objectively false.

People who put in lots of effort may also end up with something unmarketable and consequently gain no reward for their efforts, again proving your claim is objectively false.

Just as some are unwilling to accept that their effort is not enough, and thus gain no reward, again proving your claim is objectively false.

Same as for people who put in a lot of effort on something that does not yield any reward, which again proves your claim is objectively false.

That is merely a statement of religious belief advanced without evidence.

Another claim without evidence.

That is a bald falsehood, as already proved multiple times. All property in privilege -- land titles, IP monopolies, bank licenses, etc. -- inherently removes people's rights to liberty. Others are forcibly deprived of access to the opportunities they would otherwise have. Ownership of such privileges in the form of private property INDISPUTABLY abrogates everyone else's rights and damages their interests.

No, that is just another false, absurd, and disingenuous fabrication on your part. Things you have to pay someone else for are not free to own, duh, and permission is indisputably needed.

Let's say during the next election I station a thug outside the local polling place, and he charges voters $100 each to go in. Indeed, let's make it all legal: the thug has a valid, government-issued title deed that says the entrance to the polling place is his private property. You come along and protest that the thug's title deed to the entrance to the polling place -- his private property, remember -- has removed people's right to vote. I respond that no, the thug's private property has not removed anything from anyone, that people are free to vote or not "as they see fit, no permission needed," and they have "total freedom of choice" whether they pay him the $100 or not.

You would rightly call me a loathsome, evil, vicious, disgusting, despicable, lying liar, wouldn't you? And to be sure, I would be.

But what am I saying? We know you don't know enough logic to understand the implications of the above hypothetical, and will never be learning enough because that would spell the end of your false and evil beliefs, and you will say, do, and believe ANYTHING WHATEVER in order to preserve those beliefs.

No, that is just false, absurd garbage contrary to known fact. People often obtain rewards without effort. The landowner obtains his rent even while comatose.

"Earned"? What does that mean? Weren't you putting in enough effort? If you wanted to earn more money, why didn't you just do some push-ups or something? After all, if, as you say, the only criterion of reward is effort -- and push-ups certainly require quite a lot of effort, especially if you do more than a few -- then you could have earned more just by doing some push-ups. Why didn't you?

Oh, nonsense. I have also been poor, with an income well below the poverty line for years, and I didn't find it that much of an effort at all. It was merely a challenge, kind of like a game to see how low I could get my expenses while living better than people I knew had far more income.

I haven't mentioned frugality because it is irrelevant. The ultimate purpose of all economic activity is to enable consumption, not avoid it. That is why rewards are rightly given for contributions to production, not merely effort.

More nonsense. Some people are spendthrifts, but most do save -- when they are not being robbed too mercilessly.

"Carry" them"? They are quite capable of carrying themselves, IF they are not systematically robbed of their rightful earnings by private property in privilege.

No, it's robbing the productive to provide unearned wealth for the privileged that robs the truly needy and creates even more future poverty, as should be all too obvious at this moment.

You mean like lying about the private property of the thug at the polling place removing people's rights??