Oh, one other point that I forgot to mention that the video reminded me of: Why doesn’t anyone ever consider the possibility that Warren Buffet wants taxes raised because he actually benefits from it? No one doubts that a wealthy nobleman 200 years ago who wanted to raise taxes was acting in a self-interested manner. He wasn’t trying to “level the playing field” or “provide for the common weal”, he was just exhibiting common avarice. The Official Fairy Tale of Democracy says that all titles, nobility, royalty and so on magically disappeared sometime in the late-19th, early-20th century so when politicians say they want to raise our taxes, they really are the do-gooders they pretend to be. But what about the lobbies? Don’t they benefit from increased taxes which provides increased government revenues with which the government can purchase their products and services (e.g. defense industry, of which Buffet doubtless owns stock in many companies) or enforce the regulations that keep profits in their industry high (e.g. the railroads that Buffet owns), and so on? So, maybe the supposedly “do-good, give-it-all-to-charity” super-wealthy such as Buffet are not as selfless as they promote themselves to be.
@Barty: Thanks for the positive feedback, it’s encouraging to know that there are people who benefit from reading what I write.
Presumably, they do both. Savings (not investments) is a crucial part of self-insurance. You can’t buy insurance for every kind of risk. However, you can always self-insure (save money under the mattress). This is even more important for the wealthy than it is for the man on the street.
I doubt the relative effects can be quantitatively compared but I’m sure a lot more can be said by real economists about the “positive externalities” of the two.
Clayton -