Brayden Sander (UCID 10080322)
October fourteenth 2011
The author Makarenko
Classical Liberalism Versus. S. Reform Liberalism on the issue of Wealth Partage and Profits
Classical Liberalism is against government interventionism in all area of existence. They believe that everyone must be treated evenly regardless of salary. This varies from reform liberalism, as they want government intervention to ensure equality of opportunity. This is certainly made possible by simply progressive tax, government control on big business, and social welfare. In My opinion Time-honored Liberalism is superior as its fair and easier to apply than change Liberalism.
Classical Liberalists think that every man or women is in charge of their own lives, and that the authorities should not impede the individuals, or businesses pursuit of this. They also have zero mandate to improve the benefits of this, regardless of how positive, or negative. They presume that people must not be governed in a different way based on how good they are. Economical discrimination is known as a two method street, and wealthy persons should not lose excess income, or opportunity. This is why they really want a flat taxes, similar to GST, to replace the progressive income tax we have now. Reform liberalist's assume that low-income people will dedicate a greater amount of their profits on requirements, rather than luxurious goods. Consequently they should be controlled by lower income taxes rates. A progressive tax is ideal for a Reform Liberalist, as the increased duty revenue in the higher earners will be redistributed to interpersonal programs that provide welfare and equality of opportunity for the poor.
A Change Liberalist would have a problem while using big national oligopolies, while the limited competition restricts consumer flexibility, and can cause the consumers being exploited. Many Time-honored liberalists' will say that there are many large incalculable benefits that these large corporations...