Quote:
Originally Posted by plib
If the potential purchasers of the deceased author's work spend their money on his books then they will not have that income to spend on a new aspiring author, who as a result will starve to death in poverty in a garret, enduring what seems to be the usual fate of authors to die young leaving their children penniless and a charge upon the state, while society will not benefit from the expression of the new and unique ideas which died with him. Meanwhile the sales of the expired author will inevitably taper off as market saturation is reached, leaving the employees of the publishers and retailers unemployed and paying no taxes.
Which scenario is better for society?
|
So better for the already deceased and existing authors to have died young, starving to death in a garret, leaving their children a drain on the state than survive to pose a threat to the new aspiring authors who will in many cases take note of the fate of their predecessors and opt for a different career?
Perhaps we should just remove all the bankers, or street cleaners and research scientists and take away their future assets, thus paving the way for the new generation. Any volunteers?
Helen