Xentor
Moderators 
Forceful Pacifist
Posts: 391 
|
Post by Xentor on Jun 24, 2014 6:06:08 GMT -11
 I just noticed a meme on FB from "Our Time", where attention was called to the claim that some rich girl's failed wedding could have paid for an average student's tuition nearly 25.000 times. And that the birthday for her daughter could have paid for your rent for a decade. Let me be the first to tell you this is a problem. We should not begrudge rich folk their riches. Instead, we should focus on greedy people, who get rich by treating others poorly. Our society is a capitalist one. To get anything done, we need money. Gaining money is considered one way of gaining status. The American Dream is celebrated. Therefore, it is to be expected that people seek to increase their monetary value. But when that money is earned by honest work, it is a good thing. Even inherited from parents, that money is good. What parent doesn't wish to provide a good future for their children? What does require our attention, is greedy behaviour. Greedy people accrue riches by treating other people poorly. Some don't even consider the poor as humans. In America, they purposefully make things difficult for the middle class, and blame it on the poor, so the middle class turn on the poor rather than the greedy. Follow the money? Yes. But let us be critical and disapprove of bad behaviour particularly, rather than just anyone with money. |
|
|
|
Post by peonysunday on Jun 24, 2014 11:00:26 GMT -11
Quote:
What does require our attention, is greedy behaviour. Greedy people
accrue riches by treating other people poorly. Some don't even consider
the poor as humans. In America, they purposefully make things difficult
for the middle class, and blame it on the poor, so the middle class turn
on the poor rather than the greedy.
Follow the money? Yes. But let us be critical and disapprove of bad behaviour particularly, rather than just anyone with money.
end quote
This should also include people who don't think they are rich, esp administrators who earn $250,000 a year and aren't even doing their jobs. Someone loan me some lightening bolts, ASAP!!!
|
|
Cassie
Junior Member
Happy to be here
Posts: 181 
|
Post by Cassie on Jun 25, 2014 5:14:32 GMT -11
I am not a great fan of capitalism but it is the system we are in and we have to make the best of it. The problem is that for too long the Wall Street meme "greed is good" has been taken as an excuse for corrupt behaviour and uncontrolled greed, and that has resulted in many casualties both in terms of businesses and individuals. And yes the poor have suffered most and perversely are often blamed not only for their own poverty but also for the state of the economy.
The truth is a relatively small number of extremely rich and extremely greedy investment bankers caused most of the economic difficulties that effect us all.
Uncontrolled greed is actually very bad and it is about time the institutions of politics and economics said that firmly and legislated to control it. Too many people think the idea of control and regulation is at odds with capitalism. Personally I don't think capitalism can survive without it. If people fear socialism and anarchy they need to get serious about regulating capitalism, or less pleasant alternatives will be forced on them.
Greed has virtually driven capitalism to breaking point.
|
|
Graphite
Moderators
The Big Bad
Trimming fat
Posts: 453
|
Post by Graphite on Jul 9, 2014 0:35:04 GMT -11
The problem with capitalism and the concept of being rich is that becoming rich usually indicate a large amount of capital tied up, no? As in... in order to be rich you have to have money sitting there. If you lock capital up you remove it from the market making you bad for capitalism. So being rich is, in fact, a problem as far as capitalism is concerned. People who spend most of their earnings? They are the real heroes of capitalism. They keep the capital circulating, which is vital for capitalism.
The odd thing is that the people who are seen as heroes by capitalists are those who lock away large parts of the capital, and the people who lock away large parts of the capital are very often capitalists as well. Which makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by peonysunday on Jul 9, 2014 2:43:10 GMT -11
The problem with capitalism and the concept of being rich is that becoming rich usually indicate a large amount of capital tied up, no? As in... in order to be rich you have to have money sitting there. If you lock capital up you remove it from the market making you bad for capitalism. So being rich is, in fact, a problem as far as capitalism is concerned. People who spend most of their earnings? They are the real heroes of capitalism. They keep the capital circulating, which is vital for capitalism. The odd thing is that the people who are seen as heroes by capitalists are those who lock away large parts of the capital, and the people who lock away large parts of the capital are very often capitalists as well. Which makes no sense. But the rich do spend the money: maids, body guards, butlers, chef, chauffeur, lawn service, lifeguard, lawyers, nannies, tutors and the list goes on. Don't forget expensive furnishings, which may be replaced on a whim, clothes, clothes, clothes & shoe shopping and home security. Travel expenses: plane tickets or jet upkeep, gas, etc. eating out (no $1 burgers for them), $8000 a night hotels, month long vacations on secluded islands, extravagant weddings and birthday parties are not cheap. Not to mention those that donate to charities. In fact, it would seem the more money you have the more you need to spend. To keep up with the superrich is a very expensive hobby. |
|
Graphite
Moderators
The Big Bad
Trimming fat
Posts: 453
|
Post by Graphite on Jul 9, 2014 3:31:40 GMT -11
The problem with capitalism and the concept of being rich is that becoming rich usually indicate a large amount of capital tied up, no? As in... in order to be rich you have to have money sitting there. If you lock capital up you remove it from the market making you bad for capitalism. So being rich is, in fact, a problem as far as capitalism is concerned. People who spend most of their earnings? They are the real heroes of capitalism. They keep the capital circulating, which is vital for capitalism. The odd thing is that the people who are seen as heroes by capitalists are those who lock away large parts of the capital, and the people who lock away large parts of the capital are very often capitalists as well. Which makes no sense. But the rich do spend the money: maids, body guards, butlers, chef, chauffeur, lawn service, lifeguard, lawyers, nannies, tutors and the list goes on. Don't forget expensive furnishings, which may be replaced on a whim, clothes, clothes, clothes & shoe shopping and home security. Travel expenses: plane tickets or jet upkeep, gas, etc. eating out (no $1 burgers for them), $8000 a night hotels, month long vacations on secluded islands, extravagant weddings and birthday parties are not cheap. Not to mention those that donate to charities. In fact, it would seem the more money you have the more you need to spend. To keep up with the superrich is a very expensive hobby. In terms of dollar amount, sure, they spend more. In terms of percentage of income or total worth, they don't spend much at all. Luxury items are not what keeps the economy afloat. A lot of low income individuals spending 10% of their income on groceries is more significant than one rich person spending 5.4% of their income. Here's why; one rich person is just one person, but several people can actually spend money at different places for the same products and services... this means competition. Competition is pretty important in a capitalistic society... unless you want one company owning you and everything descending into wage slavery (worst case scenario) The reason government send out money during recessions in the form of stimulus packages to people, as they did in Australia in 2008, is because those $800 going to the low and middle class means money will be spent on things (provided there are decent social securities in place) and the economy will get a boost from people spending. Give a rich person $800 and they will generally not notice, and they are more likely to save it than low and middle income earners. This means $800 LESS being spent instead of $800 MORE being spent. Being rich, in terms of capitalism, is a problem in the sense of a large amount of money being kept from the market. Low and middle class? They are the blood of capitalism, they are also the ones who are usually suffering more under capitalism. Now... that doesn't mean I think rich people are naturally bad people, don't deserve their lifestyles or the like. What I do, in general, think is bad is removing capital from a capital driven market for the sake of having capital you are not using because you live in a capitalistic society. |
|
