Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hello,It seems that many people are judgemental/self righteous about a person wanting to be rich and become a millionaire. Such people are called greedy and materialistic.For instance such people are:1. New agers and some social progressives who believe that starting a business for a social end is fine, but starting a business to get rich is evil.2. Various Christian groups.3. Some old Money people that view wanting to become rich as crass.etc. Most of the above do not view actually having millions as evil, but wanting wealth as evil. For instance many old money people who are on arts boards or on college admissions boards who are worth say 20 million themselves will say when they hear a person state " I want to be rich." how crass, greedy and materialistic.Well, here are my questions:
1. Let us take two businesses, that both happen to make 5 million dollars, one was started out of a desire that is noble ( to provide green energy) and the other was started for a materialstic goal (to become a wealthy green technology entrepreneur For some reason, however, the second person despite having a less noble goal actually ends up making a better contribution to green energy ( for instance maybe he has a better grasp of technology or happened to make a more crucial contribution to the overall field), while the first person made a weaker contribution to green energy, despite having a more morally pure goal.Who is better: The person who had the materialsitic goal and inadvenrtly made a positive social contribution, or the person who had purely alturistic goals and made a lesser social contribution?
2. Let us suppose that two entrepreneurs both get wealthy and both make equal contributions to the world. However, we have one who started the business for alturistic reasons, yet happens to be authoritarian, political, and cruel. He engages in power games, underpays employees( not to obtain more wealth for himself, but to reinvest in "socially benifical technology", is a cruel and nasty SOB and breaks promises to workers. In contrast, there is a person who started their business just to get rich, but having grown up with a blue collar father, has the redeeming quality of a sense of fairplay in the workpalce and treats his employees much better.Who is better: The entrepreneur who sincerely started his company for purely alturistic reasons yet treats is employees badly based on a "ends justify the means" ideology or the entrepreneur who started his company just to get rich, yet treats his employees very well, since he happened to have a working class dad and emphasizes with working class people?
3. Picture the days of Jim Crow in the American South: One white working class person devotes hours to keeping segregation out of a sincere believe that segregation is good for society or a wealthy tycoon who opposes segregation for selfish reasons (maybe he wants to be able to hire some talented blacks to fill certain spots, maybe he wants to be able to serve both races easily and double his profits, etc?Who is better: The redneck that is pushing segregation for alturistic reasons or the tycoon that opposes it for selfish reasons?
I am just stating that people who bash people who want to be millionaires as being greedy and materialistic need to take a more nuanced stance, regarding the complexities of ends and means.
Thanks
P.S. It seems that to some "progressive or new age" people, a non rich person who admits to actually wanting the freedom, power, and wealth of a millionaire is as evil as someone who is a Neo-Nazi.
I want to be a millionaire, I better get my Swastika and Mein Kampf manual
Hello,It seems that many people are judgemental/self righteous about a person wanting to be rich and become a millionaire. Such people are called greedy and materialistic.For instance such people are:1. New agers and some social progressives who believe that starting a business for a social end is fine, but starting a business to get rich is evil.2. Various Christian groups.3. Some old Money people that view wanting to become rich as crass.etc. Most of the above do not view actually having millions as evil, but wanting wealth as evil. For instance many old money people who are on arts boards or on college admissions boards who are worth say 20 million themselves will say when they hear a person state " I want to be rich." how crass, greedy and materialistic.Well, here are my questions:
1. Let us take two businesses, that both happen to make 5 million dollars, one was started out of a desire that is noble ( to provide green energy) and the other was started for a materialstic goal (to become a wealthy green technology entrepreneur For some reason, however, the second person despite having a less noble goal actually ends up making a better contribution to green energy ( for instance maybe he has a better grasp of technology or happened to make a more crucial contribution to the overall field), while the first person made a weaker contribution to green energy, despite having a more morally pure goal.Who is better: The person who had the materialsitic goal and inadvenrtly made a positive social contribution, or the person who had purely alturistic goals and made a lesser social contribution?
2. Let us suppose that two entrepreneurs both get wealthy and both make equal contributions to the world. However, we have one who started the business for alturistic reasons, yet happens to be authoritarian, political, and cruel. He engages in power games, underpays employees( not to obtain more wealth for himself, but to reinvest in "socially benifical technology", is a cruel and nasty SOB and breaks promises to workers. In contrast, there is a person who started their business just to get rich, but having grown up with a blue collar father, has the redeeming quality of a sense of fairplay in the workpalce and treats his employees much better.Who is better: The entrepreneur who sincerely started his company for purely alturistic reasons yet treats is employees badly based on a "ends justify the means" ideology or the entrepreneur who started his company just to get rich, yet treats his employees very well, since he happened to have a working class dad and emphasizes with working class people?
3. Picture the days of Jim Crow in the American South: One white working class person devotes hours to keeping segregation out of a sincere believe that segregation is good for society or a wealthy tycoon who opposes segregation for selfish reasons (maybe he wants to be able to hire some talented blacks to fill certain spots, maybe he wants to be able to serve both races easily and double his profits, etc?Who is better: The redneck that is pushing segregation for alturistic reasons or the tycoon that opposes it for selfish reasons?
I am just stating that people who bash people who want to be millionaires as being greedy and materialistic need to take a more nuanced stance, regarding the complexities of ends and means.
Thanks
P.S. It seems that to some "progressive or new age" people, a non rich person who admits to actually wanting the freedom, power, and wealth of a millionaire is as evil as someone who is a Neo-Nazi.
I want to be a millionaire, I better get my Swastika and Mein Kampf manual
Hello,It seems that many people are judgemental/self righteous about a person wanting to be rich and become a millionaire. Such people are called greedy and materialistic.For instance such people are:1. New agers and some social progressives who believe that starting a business for a social end is fine, but starting a business to get rich is evil.2. Various Christian groups.3. Some old Money people that view wanting to become rich as crass.etc. Most of the above do not view actually having millions as evil, but wanting wealth as evil. For instance many old money people who are on arts boards or on college admissions boards who are worth say 20 million themselves will say when they hear a person state " I want to be rich." how crass, greedy and materialistic.Well, here are my questions:
1. Let us take two businesses, that both happen to make 5 million dollars, one was started out of a desire that is noble ( to provide green energy) and the other was started for a materialstic goal (to become a wealthy green technology entrepreneur For some reason, however, the second person despite having a less noble goal actually ends up making a better contribution to green energy ( for instance maybe he has a better grasp of technology or happened to make a more crucial contribution to the overall field), while the first person made a weaker contribution to green energy, despite having a more morally pure goal.Who is better: The person who had the materialsitic goal and inadvenrtly made a positive social contribution, or the person who had purely alturistic goals and made a lesser social contribution?
2. Let us suppose that two entrepreneurs both get wealthy and both make equal contributions to the world. However, we have one who started the business for alturistic reasons, yet happens to be authoritarian, political, and cruel. He engages in power games, underpays employees( not to obtain more wealth for himself, but to reinvest in "socially benifical technology", is a cruel and nasty SOB and breaks promises to workers. In contrast, there is a person who started their business just to get rich, but having grown up with a blue collar father, has the redeeming quality of a sense of fairplay in the workpalce and treats his employees much better.Who is better: The entrepreneur who sincerely started his company for purely alturistic reasons yet treats is employees badly based on a "ends justify the means" ideology or the entrepreneur who started his company just to get rich, yet treats his employees very well, since he happened to have a working class dad and emphasizes with working class people?
3. Picture the days of Jim Crow in the American South: One white working class person devotes hours to keeping segregation out of a sincere believe that segregation is good for society or a wealthy tycoon who opposes segregation for selfish reasons (maybe he wants to be able to hire some talented blacks to fill certain spots, maybe he wants to be able to serve both races easily and double his profits, etc?Who is better: The redneck that is pushing segregation for alturistic reasons or the tycoon that opposes it for selfish reasons?
I am just stating that people who bash people who want to be millionaires as being greedy and materialistic need to take a more nuanced stance, regarding the complexities of ends and means.
Thanks
P.S. It seems that to some "progressive or new age" people, a non rich person who admits to actually wanting the freedom, power, and wealth of a millionaire is as evil as someone who is a Neo-Nazi.
I want to be a millionaire, I better get my Swastika and Mein Kampf manual
Wow here is your problem with #3. The wealthy in the south kept BOTH races poor. The 1% elite plantation owners that started the Civil War and duped poor whites to fight for their cause of keeping their social structure in order, did the same thing after the Civil War and changed slavery to sharecropping. The wealthy in the south were greedy, they never invested their money back into the community like the north did. Which is why the south never had a public education system, had poor transportation networks, allowed poor whites to live in squalor and in some cases live in worse conditions then slaves did. White or black meant nothing to the rich whites. They still do it today, however instead of duping poor whites into hating blacks they dupe poor whites into hating Democrats.
OP, intentions mean nothing. The country is being dismantled by people with good intentions. Sustainable, long-term business success (the kind that produces real wealth) depends entirely on being valuable to the rest of society. It does not matter whether the wealth is the goal, or only the byproduct of the desire to be of service.
I don't care if you want to be rich or not. But learn to be happy with yourself and your life while your not. Because if your not happy now, you think having millions are going to change it and magically cure you? I've always said that having more money simply means you have a different set of problems. Personally, I'm glad I'm not a millionaire. Because when your wealthy, I suspect that it's easy to fall into a materialistic mind set and forget the important things in life such as your family, your friends, and God.
Hello,It seems that many people are judgemental/self righteous about a person wanting to be rich and become a millionaire. Such people are called greedy and materialistic.For instance such people are:1. New agers and some social progressives who believe that starting a business for a social end is fine, but starting a business to get rich is evil.2. Various Christian groups.3. Some old Money people that view wanting to become rich as crass.etc. Most of the above do not view actually having millions as evil, but wanting wealth as evil. For instance many old money people who are on arts boards or on college admissions boards who are worth say 20 million themselves will say when they hear a person state " I want to be rich." how crass, greedy and materialistic.Well, here are my questions:
1. Let us take two businesses, that both happen to make 5 million dollars, one was started out of a desire that is noble ( to provide green energy) and the other was started for a materialstic goal (to become a wealthy green technology entrepreneur For some reason, however, the second person despite having a less noble goal actually ends up making a better contribution to green energy ( for instance maybe he has a better grasp of technology or happened to make a more crucial contribution to the overall field), while the first person made a weaker contribution to green energy, despite having a more morally pure goal.Who is better: The person who had the materialsitic goal and inadvenrtly made a positive social contribution, or the person who had purely alturistic goals and made a lesser social contribution?
2. Let us suppose that two entrepreneurs both get wealthy and both make equal contributions to the world. However, we have one who started the business for alturistic reasons, yet happens to be authoritarian, political, and cruel. He engages in power games, underpays employees( not to obtain more wealth for himself, but to reinvest in "socially benifical technology", is a cruel and nasty SOB and breaks promises to workers. In contrast, there is a person who started their business just to get rich, but having grown up with a blue collar father, has the redeeming quality of a sense of fairplay in the workpalce and treats his employees much better.Who is better: The entrepreneur who sincerely started his company for purely alturistic reasons yet treats is employees badly based on a "ends justify the means" ideology or the entrepreneur who started his company just to get rich, yet treats his employees very well, since he happened to have a working class dad and emphasizes with working class people?
3. Picture the days of Jim Crow in the American South: One white working class person devotes hours to keeping segregation out of a sincere believe that segregation is good for society or a wealthy tycoon who opposes segregation for selfish reasons (maybe he wants to be able to hire some talented blacks to fill certain spots, maybe he wants to be able to serve both races easily and double his profits, etc?Who is better: The redneck that is pushing segregation for alturistic reasons or the tycoon that opposes it for selfish reasons?
I am just stating that people who bash people who want to be millionaires as being greedy and materialistic need to take a more nuanced stance, regarding the complexities of ends and means.
Thanks
P.S. It seems that to some "progressive or new age" people, a non rich person who admits to actually wanting the freedom, power, and wealth of a millionaire is as evil as someone who is a Neo-Nazi.
I want to be a millionaire, I better get my Swastika and Mein Kampf manual
Those who deride "the rich" simply pine to be "the rich" in a different system. In the USSR, there were marked class distinctions and there were "rich" and "poor", just as in Cuba and North Korea.
The left is gullible enough to really believe that there is such a thing as a classless society. With this firm belief, they are simply tools for those wanting to impose totalitarian socialism in the US. I guess they have not read thier history and want everyone to endure misery due to their lack of knowledge.
It has not worked anywhere at anytime- it will not work here.
All of this talk based on "class" is misplaced. A large fraction of the rich could be described instead as "formerly poor." How does any of this class garbage apply to them?
P.S. It seems that to some "progressive or new age" people, a non rich person who admits to actually wanting the freedom, power, and wealth of a millionaire is as evil as someone who is a Neo-Nazi.
I want to be a millionaire, I better get my Swastika and Mein Kampf manual
Seems like a lazy strawman argument to me. I've never known anybody to think it was a bad thing.
The left is gullible enough to really believe that there is such a thing as a classless society. With this firm belief, they are simply tools for those wanting to impose totalitarian socialism in the US. .
Please provide specific examples to back this claim, thanks.
Because as resources on the planet become more and more scarce and they concentrate in less and less people's hands it tends to throw the equilibrium out. You know?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
