18 Apr 2012, 6:24 pm
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,470
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
18 Apr 2012, 6:26 pm
Terlingua wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Terlingua wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Terlingua wrote:
I really don't understand the concept of wealth distribution. It seems like a way of punishing people for being successful while rewarding incompetency. Seems as though it would encourage the productive to become lazy and the lazy to become lazier still.
Ok so what's your solution...and keep in mind not everyone who's not 'successfull' is that way do to incompetency or laziness, but that is a nice assumption that certainly helps with the argument wealth distribution is 'evil' and 'bad.' but does not paint a very accurate picture...it paints an emotionally charged picture that only adds to the stigma already attached to being anywhere below middle class.
I never claimed to have a solution, though I can see fault in the solution presented by wealth distribution. Nor did I state that everyone who was unsuccessful was lazy. Productive does not mean successful, nor does lazy mean unproductive, though the latter are often linked.
Do you not think that the concept of "Steal from the rich, give to the poor" is not also emotionally charged? Place things in perspective if you will. You obviously have access to a computer, and equally obvious is that you possess the leisure time to post in a place like this. That places you in a wealth bracked several orders af magnitude higher than someone from say West Africa. To them, you are the 1%. You are the filthy capitalist that is wallowing in wealth with your 3 meals a day and running water while they starve. So in order to redistribute the wealth, shouldn't you be inviting about 100 of them into your home? I'm sure that their resource management is on par with your own, and so things should work out perfectly and fairly. Please get back to me with your success in this experimental endeavor so that I and others can begin to emulate the process.
Yes that is emotionally charged, but I don't typically throw that term around.....I mean I agree with having a safety net to help the people who are struggling to make ends meet and all that. But I don't see that as 'steal from the rich and give to the poor.'
Also yes I have a lap-top and some time to post.......that does not mean my life is great, or that I should act like everything in society and the world is fine when it's not. And how is comparing that people in third world countries might be worse off supposed to change any of the financial issues I have? I am aware there are people worse off, in other countries but that does not mean everything is rainbows and cup-cakes for citizens of the U.S either.....and well there is the whole issue of corporate america contributing to problems in these third world countries but lets ignore that and keep supporting the same BS.
Also I am not a 'capitalist' .........I am not 'wallowing' in wealth I don't have 3 meals a day and the only way I have running water is people let me live at their house, I can't afford any of that though. Also where in the hell do you think I am going to get money to afford to go get 100 people from Africa? and I don't have a house like I said. What success are you expecting me to have when I cant even keep a job for longer then a couple months.
Personally, I am not responsible for the world. I am responsible for myself and those very few individuals which I have strong emotional ties to. I had rather burn all of my wealth and do without than hand any portion of it over to someone who may or may not make financial decisions as well as I do. Ask me to help and I probably will(Because I am an absolute sucker for sob stories). Insist that I help because someone has less than I and I will tell you to get bent.
But I should be responsible for the whole world.....if I disagree with the way the systems set up?
I honestly don't expect everyone, or even mostly everyone, to be successful. There is a reason that 99% of all species that have inhabited the world are extinct. I am as successful as I am due partly to chance and partly through drive.
My problem is that wealth distribution really won't solve anything, and that the effort might even be detrimental to humanity overall. Some people have genetic makeup that is superior to others. Would it make sense to demand that those people mate with everyone that has inferior genes? Should Stephen Hawking's sperm be harvested so that we can impregnate women with lower IQ's in order to give their children a fair break? Should we do the same with Arnold Schwarzenegger's sperm so that others could have a better physique?
I want Arnold's muscles and Stephen's brain! Life is so unfair that I wasn't given both! If I can't have it, then we need to cripple Arnold & give Stephen a lobotomy. Makes as much sense as wealth distribution
When did I ever suggest anything like that?
Joker
Veteran
Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
18 Apr 2012, 6:37 pm
18 Apr 2012, 6:37 pm
Terlingua wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Terlingua wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Terlingua wrote:
I really don't understand the concept of wealth distribution. It seems like a way of punishing people for being successful while rewarding incompetency. Seems as though it would encourage the productive to become lazy and the lazy to become lazier still.
Ok so what's your solution...and keep in mind not everyone who's not 'successfull' is that way do to incompetency or laziness, but that is a nice assumption that certainly helps with the argument wealth distribution is 'evil' and 'bad.' but does not paint a very accurate picture...it paints an emotionally charged picture that only adds to the stigma already attached to being anywhere below middle class.
I never claimed to have a solution, though I can see fault in the solution presented by wealth distribution. Nor did I state that everyone who was unsuccessful was lazy. Productive does not mean successful, nor does lazy mean unproductive, though the latter are often linked.
Do you not think that the concept of "Steal from the rich, give to the poor" is not also emotionally charged? Place things in perspective if you will. You obviously have access to a computer, and equally obvious is that you possess the leisure time to post in a place like this. That places you in a wealth bracked several orders af magnitude higher than someone from say West Africa. To them, you are the 1%. You are the filthy capitalist that is wallowing in wealth with your 3 meals a day and running water while they starve. So in order to redistribute the wealth, shouldn't you be inviting about 100 of them into your home? I'm sure that their resource management is on par with your own, and so things should work out perfectly and fairly. Please get back to me with your success in this experimental endeavor so that I and others can begin to emulate the process.
Yes that is emotionally charged, but I don't typically throw that term around.....I mean I agree with having a safety net to help the people who are struggling to make ends meet and all that. But I don't see that as 'steal from the rich and give to the poor.'
Also yes I have a lap-top and some time to post.......that does not mean my life is great, or that I should act like everything in society and the world is fine when it's not. And how is comparing that people in third world countries might be worse off supposed to change any of the financial issues I have? I am aware there are people worse off, in other countries but that does not mean everything is rainbows and cup-cakes for citizens of the U.S either.....and well there is the whole issue of corporate america contributing to problems in these third world countries but lets ignore that and keep supporting the same BS.
Also I am not a 'capitalist' .........I am not 'wallowing' in wealth I don't have 3 meals a day and the only way I have running water is people let me live at their house, I can't afford any of that though. Also where in the hell do you think I am going to get money to afford to go get 100 people from Africa? and I don't have a house like I said. What success are you expecting me to have when I cant even keep a job for longer then a couple months.
Personally, I am not responsible for the world. I am responsible for myself and those very few individuals which I have strong emotional ties to. I had rather burn all of my wealth and do without than hand any portion of it over to someone who may or may not make financial decisions as well as I do. Ask me to help and I probably will(Because I am an absolute sucker for sob stories). Insist that I help because someone has less than I and I will tell you to get bent.
But I should be responsible for the whole world.....if I disagree with the way the systems set up?
I honestly don't expect everyone, or even mostly everyone, to be successful. There is a reason that 99% of all species that have inhabited the world are extinct. I am as successful as I am due partly to chance and partly through drive.
My problem is that wealth distribution really won't solve anything, and that the effort might even be detrimental to humanity overall. Some people have genetic makeup that is superior to others. Would it make sense to demand that those people mate with everyone that has inferior genes? Should Stephen Hawking's sperm be harvested so that we can impregnate women with lower IQ's in order to give their children a fair break? Should we do the same with Arnold Schwarzenegger's sperm so that others could have a better physique?
I want Arnold's muscles and Stephen's brain! Life is so unfair that I wasn't given both! If I can't have it, then we need to cripple Arnold & give Stephen a lobotomy. Makes as much sense as wealth distribution
Sorry I can't have more tact, but that's the most simplistic, idiotic, and just plain insulting argument I've ever heard. This social darwinism crap will be death of any prosperous and civilized society.
You should know that despite Stephen Hawking's intelligence, he has a chronic disease that requires him to rely on others to survive. According to the laws of nature he is not "fit" to live.
19 Apr 2012, 7:55 am
