10 Ways to Force the Stinking Rich to Share Their Wealth (ideologies, rating)
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.
You didn't earn being born in a free country or a wealthy country. You earned your privileged state exactly as much as those born into extreme poverty, and it is not "envy" to point out that they experience drastically more suffering for no other reason than chance. It has literally nothing to do with choice or earning or justification. However, it's nice to see you finally hoist yourself on your own petard when noting that you "availed [yourself] of [society's] benefits." That's the point. You didn't make it on your own and without that society's vast store of infrastructure, knowledge, educational support systems, etc... you would have achieved nothing (or but a fraction) of what you have. You owe all your success to society and the generations of the past. You stand upon the shoulders of hundreds of millions through nothing of your own doing but luck.
Amazing, but I never spoke of envy. Anymore than a victim who is mugged envies the thief. You, perversely, think that society protecting the massive and unearned store of wealth, knowledge, infrastructure, etc... from being stolen by a tiny fragment of the population is theft. Simultaneously, the bandits, bethinking themselves the prime movers, are praised as the deserving. Well, you won't get assent to such a mad idea from me.
Second, from a utilitarian perspective, it's not about envy, but about maximizing human happiness. Why should some suffer due to unearned circumstance? Given the reality of decreasing marginal utility, inequality is necessarily related to net decreases in human happiness and a concomitant increase in unnecessary human suffering. As I mentioned very bluntly, but which you did not address, if the purpose of society is to protect and expand upon unearned iniquities, then what purpose does society serve that the state of nature would not equally serve?
This is exactly why libertarianism is indistinguishable from fascism. I asked you any number of times (in a previous thread) to point out how someone "makes themselves better" without appealing to uncaused causes (i.e. the so-called self-made man) and you never answered. However, if it ultimately comes down to "being born better", then your system is indeed fascistic. Money is power. In your society, the "betters" are born deserving power by virtue of their unearned luck. This is indistinguishable from the divine right of kings or perpetual, hereditary dictatorship, or fascism.
Where does this psychology of hating those who have "unearned lucky benefits" ultimately lead? Here:
Quote:
The Isla Vista killer wrote in his "twisted world" journal that when his "life took a very dark turn" at 17, he began fantasizing about punishing "all of the popular kids and young couples for the crime of having a better life than me."[emphasis mine] Elliot Rodger, 22, stabbed to death three people in his apartment, shot two women to death outside a sorority house and killed another man inside a deli with gunfire before killing himself near the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara, on Friday, investigators said.
The summer of 2011, when Rodger turned 19, marked the start of his "endgame," in which he wold either find "love, sex, friends, fun, acceptance, a sense of belonging," or vengeance against those who did enjoy that life, he wrote.
Those who resent what others have can lead lives of quiet desperation. Or, as sometimes happens, they can go postal. In either case, the psychology of the "unjust world" leads to the same dead end.
If I could choose to live in a country where all the CEOs had suddenly disappeared, or a country where all the janitors disappeared, dishwashers, cleaners, and cashiers disappeared, I think I would vastly prefer life in the first one.
Really? I've never met a janitor, dishwasher or cashier that has given me a job. You don't understand that if the CEO disappears, so would those other jobs. Because they don't work for nothing, and without a business, they have no job.
Luckily, realists and pessimists tend to live longer. That said, you are certainly right. Socialism is the only thing that brings light to my heart. Because I realize the world is unjust and work to change it, it is a very uphill battle.
Not sure what kind of heart gets lightened by the systematic killing of it's populace. Socialist governments have killed more people than any other sort of government. If you find that something that lifts up your heart, it's pretty scary.
Although it is a virtual matter of faith on "the Left" that "the poor" are poor because "the rich" are rich, there is little correlation between poverty rates and inequality. Poverty rates have sometimes risen during periods of relatively stable levels of inequality and declined during times of rising inequality. The idea that gains by one person necessarily mean losses by another reflects a zero-sum view of the economy that is simply untethered to history or economics. The economy is not fixed in size, with the only question being one of distribution. Rather, the entire pie can grow, with more resources available to all. The moment I hear the rich brought up I know we are not seriously discussing economics(at least not in any meaningful way) but rather making an emotional argument about our disdain for their wealth.
Mind you I am no republican "right winger" or libertarian
Really? I've never met a janitor, dishwasher or cashier that has given me a job. You don't understand that if the CEO disappears, so would those other jobs. Because they don't work for nothing, and without a business, they have no job.
And if all the sales department or whatever disappears, the CEO and everyone will lose their jobs.
Where does this psychology of hating those who have "unearned lucky benefits" ultimately lead? Here:
Those who resent what others have can lead lives of quiet desperation. Or, as sometimes happens, they can go postal. In either case, the psychology of the "unjust world" leads to the same dead end.
Wow. Unbelievable. So if someone who is suffering but believes they MUST deserve the suffering because somehow they did something wrong (to justify their loneliness and pain), that would make it better. THAT, of all things, would decrease these incidents!?
What a twisted and grotesque post. Not to mention totally illogical.
Not sure what kind of heart gets lightened by the systematic killing of it's populace. Socialist governments have killed more people than any other sort of government. If you find that something that lifts up your heart, it's pretty scary.
Yeah, that's totally what I meant. I meant that I'm a fan of Stalin and Mao. That was heavy sarcasm, in case you were wondering.
Socialism, implemented in already existing democracies, has never led to such things. Stalin and Mao (and Pol Pot, if you wish to include him, even though he was as opposed to Marx and most Socialist theorists as is possible) were part of revolutionary governments.
I aim to win hearts to egalitarianism at the ballot box, not at the point of a gun. It is the capitalists who have always and continue to defend their unearned property with the force of the state and the force of the police. And who attempt to buy out democracy whenever possible.
Although it is a virtual matter of faith on "the Left" that "the poor" are poor because "the rich" are rich, there is little correlation between poverty rates and inequality. Poverty rates have sometimes risen during periods of relatively stable levels of inequality and declined during times of rising inequality. The idea that gains by one person necessarily mean losses by another reflects a zero-sum view of the economy that is simply untethered to history or economics. The economy is not fixed in size, with the only question being one of distribution. Rather, the entire pie can grow, with more resources available to all. The moment I hear the rich brought up I know we are not seriously discussing economics(at least not in any meaningful way) but rather making an emotional argument about our disdain for their wealth.
Mind you I am no republican "right winger" or libertarian
Why does it matter if growth occurs if all of the "benefit" goes to those who receive no utility? Not only that, but human labor and resources are wasted in creating that wealth. There is no free lunch from a utilitarian perspective, either. You can have a growing economy that produces little or no functional value. Luxury goods can play a role in growth without creating any additional utility. Wages and savings have remained stagnant in inflation-adjusted terms for the bottom 40% of the population in the U.S. for 35 years. The poorest (bottom 10%) has seen decreases in wages and also decreases in "baseline" welfare programs like actual Welfare (i.e. TANF).
Equally important, he zero sum/infinite sum argument misses out that growth rates are constrained and growth is slower in the developed world than in growing countries that are in earlier stages of economic development.
Finally, there is a growing body of evidence from behavioral psychology that inequality - on its own - is unhealthy and destructive to our happiness and perceptions of the world. We don't exist as horses feeding from a trough, but as social animals. To pervert a biblical phrase, we do not survive on bread alone. Huge discrepancies in wealth rend society apart and create unhappiness. Economics should be about maximizing utility, not racking up a high score as if the world is some video game.
Wow. Unbelievable. So if someone who is suffering but believes they MUST deserve the suffering because somehow they did something wrong (to justify their loneliness and pain), that would make it better. THAT, of all things, would decrease these incidents!?
What a twisted and grotesque post. Not to mention totally illogical.
So, in this case, the miscreant who decides to take matters into his own hands to punish those who did well in the human luck lottery ends up dead. But his insane envy was not without a goal. To use force and violence to equalize his perceived inequity. In one sense, one can appreciate his honesty: "I hate those who were born with more talents or better parents or a less stupid brain than me, so I'm going to take their lives."
So, how do collectivists behave? In exactly the same way, except hiding in the bushes by using social structures and political action to exact the same toll as our murderer. The act of murder is so heinous because it robs one the one thing that is totally limited for all of us: Time. Money is a condensation of time. One who has money can control the time of others. So what a collectivist does instead of directly murdering people is to take a cowardly indirect route by stealing their money. And, since money is in fact time, collectivists are murderers, just with different techniques. And, what is even worse, is that they attempt to window dress their murder with ostensibly virtuous motives. And today they are even more brazen, claiming inequality due to accidents of birth and genetics. And professing that such inequalities justify redistribution of wealth, a.k.a. theft of time, a.k.a. murder. It is slow, and nondramatic, and doesn't require blood on one's hands, at least not in an obvious sense.. But make no mistake, collectivism and socialism are murder, just like the murder carried out by the miscreant who decided to kill people because he felt they had better lives than he did.
So the next time you're feeling sanctimonious and pompous as you envision the theft of money from people according to their ability, to give to the "unequal" according to their need, just remember what you really are doing. You want to talk grotesque and twisted? Better own your own motives comrade!
Money is a condensation of time. One who has money can control the time of others.
I quite agree! Indeed, this is why economic inequality and capitalism are so monstrous on their face. The wealthy literally control the lives of the poor and disadvantaged. They steal their lives and time.
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.
