Benevolence: Moral Obligations of the Rich

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Old Blue Collar Joe

Only retard here is you. Personal freedom DOES trump mob rule.

I'm guessing by "mob rule" you mean any sort of collective benefit, and by "personal freedom" you mean "the right to be a selfish doucheface and tell yourself you're not hurting anyone in doing so".

Spoilers: There is no way to reconcile the "personal freedom" of yourself with the "personal freedom" of others. All of your actions impact others, and you started with a disproportionate advantage compared to the vast majority of humans. In fact, the type of society where you imagine "personal freedom" is maximized is ironically the one where personal success has the most negative impact on the personal freedom of others.

Quote:

Food and education ARE in the safety net.

Except that poor people have far worse education, and obesity and diabetes are poverty-related illnesses in the US.

Quote:

And yeah, you can give people enough to the point where they see no reason to try harder.

Source?

Your determination of what those two mean are your personal freedom and choice to believe it however you wish to see it, regardless of how delusional it is.
'Collective benefit' is a nice little code word of the 'we can't do it on our own and think you should support our stupid a**' crowd.
They don't have far worse education. It falls on the same standards as every other school. What they have is communities in urban areas that don't give two ******** about taking advantage of what is offered and giving trouble making s**t bags multiple passes regardless of how much it hurts anyone attempting to succeed.
Most obesity can be offset with exercise and stop eating so much pre made foods.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

Old Blue Collar Joe

Your determination of what those two mean are your personal freedom and choice to believe it however you wish to see it, regardless of how delusional it is.
'Collective benefit' is a nice little code word of the 'we can't do it on our own and think you should support our stupid a**' crowd.

What, you think that because you have a job, you 'support' yourself? I'm sure you wake up at 5am every morning to go work in fields all day for your food (since farms are subsidized, getting your food from a farm means you support collectivism over personal freedom), don't use electricity (since doing so would support collective knowledge over personal freedom), don't need any sort of fuel (since fuel extraction and refinement requires large, collective efforts) or things made by an advanced economy like a stereo, computer, or internet connection.

Quote:

They don't have far worse education. It falls on the same standards as every other school. What they have is communities in urban areas that don't give two ******** about taking advantage of what is offered and giving trouble making s**t bags multiple passes regardless of how much it hurts anyone attempting to succeed.

Are you ******** kidding me? So basically, you think poor kids are born stupid assholes that are unwilling to learn, and that's why they do worse in school?
Education and poverty in rural China

Quote:

Most obesity can be offset with exercise and stop eating so much pre made foods.

I don't ******** care how to offset obesity, that wasn't the point of what I wrote.

What's the source of your bullshit studies/accurate studies that you didn't read correctly?

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Old Blue Collar Joe

Your determination of what those two mean are your personal freedom and choice to believe it however you wish to see it, regardless of how delusional it is.
'Collective benefit' is a nice little code word of the 'we can't do it on our own and think you should support our stupid a**' crowd.

What, you think that because you have a job, you 'support' yourself? I'm sure you wake up at 5am every morning to go work in fields all day for your food (since farms are subsidized, getting your food from a farm means you support collectivism over personal freedom), don't use electricity (since doing so would support collective knowledge over personal freedom), don't need any sort of fuel (since fuel extraction and refinement requires large, collective efforts) or things made by an advanced economy like a stereo, computer, or internet connection.

Quote:

They don't have far worse education. It falls on the same standards as every other school. What they have is communities in urban areas that don't give two ******** about taking advantage of what is offered and giving trouble making s**t bags multiple passes regardless of how much it hurts anyone attempting to succeed.

Are you ******** kidding me? So basically, you think poor kids are born stupid assholes that are unwilling to learn, and that's why they do worse in school?
Education and poverty in rural China

Quote:

Most obesity can be offset with exercise and stop eating so much pre made foods.

I don't ******** care how to offset obesity, that wasn't the point of what I wrote.

What's the source of your bullshit studies/accurate studies that you didn't read correctly?

You're funny. Utterly immune to comments and come back with some short bus s**t in rebuttal. China? Like I give two ******** what their problems are? Seriously?
Support myself? Well gee...I pay for the stuff I get from others, from work I provide to others. It's essentially the ever popular barter system with paper promissory notes they can then trade to another. So yeah, i do pay my own way. Do you?

Didn't say they were all stupid ********, did I? Want to open your mind a bit? Watch Little Rock, 50 years later. A good many of those at the bottom of the school system are there because they are not respecting an education and simply strolling along, killing time in school. Willfully stupid.

[low iq 111]

Old Blue Collar Joe

Stopped after the first line because the utter ignorance and extremism displayed in it prove you're nothing but another far sider who lives with mommy and daddy and have no clue.
Someone deciding to keep what is theirs has no relation to murder whatsoever.

you're trying to defend your point by arguing your logic or what makes sense to you. so if your mantra has exceptions why would you even repeat it as a valid argument for your opinions?

[low iq 111]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Old Blue Collar Joe

Only retard here is you. Personal freedom DOES trump mob rule.

I'm guessing by "mob rule" you mean any sort of collective benefit, and by "personal freedom" you mean "the right to be a selfish doucheface and tell yourself you're not hurting anyone in doing so".

Spoilers: There is no way to reconcile the "personal freedom" of yourself with the "personal freedom" of others. All of your actions impact others, and you started with a disproportionate advantage compared to the vast majority of humans. In fact, the type of society where you imagine "personal freedom" is maximized is ironically the one where personal success has the most negative impact on the personal freedom of others.

Quote:

Food and education ARE in the safety net.

Except that poor people have far worse education, and obesity and diabetes are poverty-related illnesses in the US.

Quote:

And yeah, you can give people enough to the point where they see no reason to try harder.

Source?

this and people have to apply for food stamps.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

Old Blue Collar Joe

Support myself? Well gee...I pay for the stuff I get from others, from work I provide to others. It's essentially the ever popular barter system with paper promissory notes they can then trade to another. So yeah, i do pay my own way.

Yeah, by taking from people that do way more work than you for way less than you have. Let me guess, you repair AC units?

[God Emperor Akhenaton]

I do believe it is the purpose of the rich to serve the nation/'s they operate in. To not do so is harmful to the world as a whole.

[tansyuduri]

Exoth XIII

Michael Noire

A rich man doesn't get to determine if his tax dollars go to a space program or to blowing up children in some poverty stricken middle eastern territory. A rich man doesn't get to determine if his tax dollars are spent on the cure for his wife's cancer, or on a monstrous fund raiser and banquette with no actual dollars going to cancer research itself. Tax dollars are highly inefficient, and seldom beneficent.

The wealthy do have a moral obligation to better the world they live in, but that should not be construed as a responsibility to pay even more taxes that do little to improve our quality of life.

Let us be frank. After paying their tax dollars, rich people have plenty of regular dollars left, and it's pretty clear that they don't like spending it on higher pursuits; most money winds up hoarded, stored in investments as a means of generating yet more money. To these people, money isn't a means, but an end.

Taxes won't get the rich to use all of their money well, but at least some of it goes to infrastructure. While actual benevolence is ideal, it's seldom seen. (The most notable example of a benevolent rich guy, in my mind, would be Lorenzo De' Medici, whose family was wealthy, and controlled a city. He turned it into a cultural center, and helped to spark the Italian Renaissance.)

I agree with this here. Besides taxes are not pointless. I wonder if you've bothered to look up what things you use everyday that are only there due to taxes. I'd call funding good roads, some form of public education, (we can get into how messed up it is but that is another discussion) the police, and the fire department important. Wouldn't you?

[mellifluous glass optics]

This is one of the areas I kind of agree with the right-wing side.

I don't see any reason in punishing someone for making more money than the average person. If anything, it would make me uncomfortable to be wealthy in America and I'd just take my money, investments, and jobs to a place that appreciated my wealth and the skills that lead to it.

Reminds me a bit of Atlas Shrugged.

[Project 429]

mellifluous glass optics

This is one of the areas I kind of agree with the right-wing side.

I don't see any reason in punishing someone for making more money than the average person. If anything, it would make me uncomfortable to be wealthy in America and I'd just take my money, investments, and jobs to a place that appreciated my wealth and the skills that lead to it.

Reminds me a bit of Atlas Shrugged.

In Galt's Gulch, someone had to clean the toilets. Nevermind obligation, (none exists) if the rich have any sort of self-preservation - they won't let wealth consolidate enough to make meeting the standards of living difficult. The problem is that the rich are human (even if they see themselves as ubermensch) and are fundamentally stupid.

Legal sheparding is needed. The idea is to make the law as unintrusive as possible while exploiting loopholes in psychology. I think the soda ban in new york is a good (but not perfect) example of that principle in action.

[mellifluous glass optics]

Project 429

mellifluous glass optics

This is one of the areas I kind of agree with the right-wing side.

I don't see any reason in punishing someone for making more money than the average person. If anything, it would make me uncomfortable to be wealthy in America and I'd just take my money, investments, and jobs to a place that appreciated my wealth and the skills that lead to it.

Reminds me a bit of Atlas Shrugged.

In Galt's Gulch, someone had to clean the toilets. Nevermind obligation, (none exists) if the rich have any sort of self-preservation - they won't let wealth consolidate enough to make meeting the standards of living difficult. The problem is that the rich are human (even if they see themselves as ubermensch) and are fundamentally stupid.

Legal sheparding is needed. The idea is to make the law as unintrusive as possible while exploiting loopholes in psychology. I think the soda ban in new york is a good (but not perfect) example of that principle in action.

Sorry, I don't support communism.

[Michael Noire]

actually some poor kids are stupid assholes who have no desire to learn. But there's some of those in every social class. There's also the problem of the definition of education and cost-benefits analysis. If Angelo Johnson is told he can work for 5 hours a day earning $5000 or 40 hours a week earning $360, he's going to take the drug Dealer Job. That's not stupid, it's risky. Being a Stock Broker or Investment Banker is Risky. You can get caught doing something that someone else thinks is illegal and end up in prison, or dead. Some schools and classrooms are wastes of time. That's something bleeding hearts can't comprehend, but even Tech sector executives have started to point it out. Sometimes dropping out of school is the smart decision because what you are learning in school is what the school wants to teach, which may be entirely worthless compared to an apprenticeship or technical education at a trade school or working with friends or family.

At first I didn't think this subject of education was relevant, but in retrospect, education is a highly relevant aspect of this topic. Public schools attempt to force children to learn a curriculum that a wealthy parent might find completely worthless. Private schools are built and maintained to teach these children what they need to know, but then a Federal Board of education tries to force nonsensical policies on even private institutions and challenge the authority of a solid, functional private education. Obama wants education to start at 2 or 3 years old now, so the child has even less years with the parents. Why?

These are questions people who want to live in a sheltered life don't want to ask, but if you are earning or inheriting a good salary or savings, then you need to ask yourself these tough questions, you may want to be left alone to educate your children and future employees in a way that makes sense to you, without government interference, much less higher taxes to make your kids even less intelligent and more obedient to government inspired socialist ethics.

[Project 429]

mellifluous glass optics

Project 429

mellifluous glass optics

This is one of the areas I kind of agree with the right-wing side.

I don't see any reason in punishing someone for making more money than the average person. If anything, it would make me uncomfortable to be wealthy in America and I'd just take my money, investments, and jobs to a place that appreciated my wealth and the skills that lead to it.

Reminds me a bit of Atlas Shrugged.

In Galt's Gulch, someone had to clean the toilets. Nevermind obligation, (none exists) if the rich have any sort of self-preservation - they won't let wealth consolidate enough to make meeting the standards of living difficult. The problem is that the rich are human (even if they see themselves as ubermensch) and are fundamentally stupid.

Legal sheparding is needed. The idea is to make the law as unintrusive as possible while exploiting loopholes in psychology. I think the soda ban in new york is a good (but not perfect) example of that principle in action.

Sorry, I don't support communism.

Rousseau was no communist.