Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » It's Basically Just Immoral To Be Rich
  1. Results 1 to 30 of 153
  2. Page 1 of 6
  3. 1
  4. 2
  5. 3
  7. Last

Thread: It's Basically Just Immoral To Be Rich

post 1491270061 04-16-2017, 06:01 AM
-
#1
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306

It's Basically Just Immoral To Be Rich

Excerpts from the article...

"(“I don’t hate capitalism, I just hate rich people” is a perfectly legitimate and consistent perspective.)

I therefore think there is a sort of deflection that goes on with defences of wealth. If we find it appalling that there are so many rich people in a time of need, we are asked to consider questions of acquisition rather than questions of retention. The retention question, after all, is much harder for a wealthy person to answer. It’s one thing to argue that you got rich legitimately. It’s another to explain why you feel justified in spending your wealth upon houses and sculptures rather than helping some struggling people pay their rent or paying off a bunch of student loans or saving thousands of people from dying of malaria. There may be nothing unseemly about the process by which a basketball player earns his millions (we can debate this). But there’s certainly something unseemly about having those millions. "

"We can define something like a “maximum moral income” beyond which it’s obviously inexcusable not to give away all of your money. It might be 5o thousand. Call it 100, though. Per person. With an additional 50 allowed per child. This means two parents with a child can still earn $250,000! That’s so much money. And you can keep it. But everyone who earns anything beyond it is obligated to give the excess away in its entirety. The refusal to do so means intentionally allowing others to suffer, a statement which is true regardless of whether you “earned” or “deserved” the income you were originally given. (Personally, I think the maximum moral income is probably much lower, but let’s just set it here so that everyone can agree on it. I do tend to think that moral requirements should be attainable in practice, and a $30k threshold would actually require people experience some deprivation whereas a $100k threshold indisputably still leaves you with an incredibly comfortable lifestyle better than almost any other had by anyone in history.)"

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/...ral-to-be-rich

I agree with the article.

Most miscers seemingly want to live like Dan Bilzarian, but I hope that at least Christian (Jesus was a minimalist), Buddhist, and Sikh miscers will be sympathetic to the article.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Co1Iptd4p4
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491270131 04-16-2017, 06:04 AM
-
#2
  1. fleeceitout
  2. Triggering the alt-left
  1. fleeceitout
  2. Triggering the alt-left
  3. Join Date: Aug 2015
  4. Posts: 10,281
  5. Rep Power: 28014
I'm not reading all that chit you peasant.
Your favorite miscer’s favorite miscer.
post 1491270191 04-16-2017, 06:06 AM
-
#3
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By fleeceitout⏩
I'm not reading all that chit you peasant.
2 paragraphs.

C'mon Brah.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491270261 04-16-2017, 06:08 AM
-
#4
  1. ImUTI
  2. Registered User
  1. ImUTI
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2014
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 2,934
  6. Rep Power: 1397
Lol gtfo
post 1491270351 04-16-2017, 06:11 AM
-
#5
  1. Cntempt4theWeak
  2. Registered User
  1. Cntempt4theWeak
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2016
  4. Age: 33
  5. Posts: 574
  6. Rep Power: 1858
It's immoral to be poor. We should incentivize becoming rich by instituting a regressive tax. Something like 100% for <20k, 80% 20-49k, 60% 50-99k, 40% 100-499k, 20% 500k-1 mil, 0% 1 mil and up.
post 1491270541 04-16-2017, 06:15 AM
-
#6
  1. butwhowasfeel
  2. ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
  1. butwhowasfeel
  2. ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
  3. Join Date: Oct 2012
  4. Posts: 26,130
  5. Rep Power: 88670
the poor people cope is strong
pm me ur pics and ill rep u haha jk no homo lol haha no but srsly pls pm me ur pics haha just glutes and maybe face haha no homo again lol just kidding kinda not rly lol pls send them
post 1491270921 04-16-2017, 06:22 AM
-
#7
  1. StrngLrkrOPeace
  2. Registered User
  1. StrngLrkrOPeace
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2012
  4. Posts: 5,666
  5. Rep Power: 8501
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
"We can define something like a “maximum moral income”
see, this is what rustles me about these leftist *******s. they been crying about legislating morality for decades. now look.

yes, alot of wealthy people are douchebags, but just no to "defining a moral income"
*always pick 4 crew*
*vasectomy crew*
*house stark crew*
post 1491271001 04-16-2017, 06:25 AM
-
#8
  1. PatheticPeter
  2. Registered User
  1. PatheticPeter
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Age: 23
  5. Posts: 8,624
  6. Rep Power: 39163
It is immoral to be poor, as then you are a burden on someone else who is picking up the slack for you.

But no worries, since the poor out number the rich, they place people in power who loot the coffers of the rich and redistribute the wealth.
If you think its not looting, check the definition of the word and then the powers our revenue collecting agencies have.
post 1491271121 04-16-2017, 06:27 AM
-
#9
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2015
  4. Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Age: 29
  6. Posts: 1,311
  7. Rep Power: 5102
Theres a strong correlation between wealth and religious beliefs you look at very poor countries they all have very high levels of religious adherence whilst wealthier countries are the opposite. Why am i bringing up religion? well reigion often looks down upon those who have wealth or success/power. Money is an incentive to work. And if ppl all earn the same (communism) or earn just enough to live (minimalism) then no one would strive to further society. Everyone needs money. Ive met alot of wealthy ppl in my life and let me tell you something they 1) sleep less then people on low incomes 2) they obviously get more out of life with the financial ability to do what they want 3) they have a passion for success rather than some lazy kunt who only wants to make enough money to eat. I gurantee u if you make a poll on the misc saying whether ppl would like to earn more or just enough you would see where ppl are coming from

inb4 you say this is an indoctrinated belief imo even the ancient greeks strived to live better its innate human condition (reproduction and survival) one cannot simply survive to the best of their abilties on minimum wage
post 1491271161 04-16-2017, 06:28 AM
-
#10
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By StrngLrkrOPeace⏩
see, this is what rustles me about these leftist *******s. they been crying about legislating morality for decades. now look.

yes, alot of wealthy people are douchebags, but just no to "defining a moral income"
Why not?

I think it would be a good idea to have a discussion about a moral threshold for wealth.

The person in the article wasn't proposing legislation, they were just examining the ethics of retaining wealth.

IME it's a rare discussion to have. A lot of the debate seems to be around acquisition, or how much is it OK for people to legally retain (eg. capitalism vs socialism debates).
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491271231 04-16-2017, 06:29 AM
-
#11
  1. FannySkelper
  2. Banned
  1. FannySkelper
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Oct 2014
  4. Posts: 15,479
  5. Rep Power: 0
Being rich is relative for me, my goal is 50k a year in GBP £.

I came from a poor background and for me 50k plus my gfs income would be a relatively affluent life considering housing prices.

I'm working towards this goal, I achieved a promotion last week which will help but there are still ways to go, I still need to study and achieve more qualifications to get there. Being a CEO 10k a day is a nice thing to brag or pretend about, but with that much money there's nothing you can even spend it on, its unrealistic. Set small achievable goals and see how far you can get. Be grateful for what you have. Money isnt everything but it helps
post 1491271361 04-16-2017, 06:33 AM
-
#12
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Posts: 6,523
  5. Rep Power: 15235
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
Why not?

I think it would be a good idea to have a discussion about a moral threshold for wealth.

The person in the article wasn't proposing legislation, they were just examining the ethics of retaining wealth.

IME it's a rare discussion to have. A lot of the debate seems to be around acquisition, or how much is it OK for people to legally retain (eg. capitalism vs socialism debates).
Money equals motivation. Motivation equals the creation of the extraordinary things we have today. Take away that motivation and what happens? Capping income is essentially just full blown socialism. Why would anyone work? The immoral rich ppl will take care of them. Except now there are much less immoral rich people because you just took away their motivation.
post 1491271391 04-16-2017, 06:33 AM
-
#13
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩
Ive met alot of wealthy ppl in my life and let me tell you something they 1) sleep less then people on low incomes 2) they obviously get more out of life with the financial ability to do what they want 3) they have a passion for success rather than some lazy kunt who only wants to make enough money to eat. I gurantee u if you make a poll on the misc saying whether ppl would like to earn more or just enough you would see where ppl are coming from
This isn't a discussion about acquisition, or rich people's work ethic, this is about questioning the ethics of hoard millions and billions of dollars while people starve to death.

Literally multi-millionaires and billionaires will have money in banks for years, not even using the wealth to make purchases, literally just hoarding it. Ethical?

(I'm going to avoid the statement about the profit motive, because that would turn this into a 'capitalism' debate.)
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491271481 04-16-2017, 06:34 AM
-
#14
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By mCheech⏩
Money equals motivation. Motivation equals the creation of the extraordinary things we have today. Take away that motivation and what happens? Capping income is essentially just full blown socialism. Why would anyone work?
This isn't a discussion about the wealth acquisition, this is a discussion about wealth retention.

Nor did the article propose legislation. This is a discussion of ethics, not economic or political theory.

This is a discussion of a voluntary wealth threshold.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491271831 04-16-2017, 06:44 AM
-
#15
  1. joshewwah
  2. Registered User
  1. joshewwah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Location: Australia
  5. Posts: 10,874
  6. Rep Power: 6436
Communist till you get rich crew
post 1491271921 04-16-2017, 06:45 AM
-
#16
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Posts: 6,523
  5. Rep Power: 15235
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
This isn't a discussion about the wealth acquisition, this is a discussion about wealth retention.

Nor did the article propose legislation. This is a discussion of ethics, not economic or political theory.

This is a discussion of a voluntary wealth threshold.
Taking away money after you earn it is no different than restricting acquisition.

If you work for the money and earn millions, you deserve every penny. I can see an argument against the morality of wealth inheritance though.
post 1491271981 04-16-2017, 06:46 AM
-
#17
  1. nutsy54
  2. Random Words
  1. nutsy54
  2. Random Words
  3. Join Date: Apr 2003
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 126,581
  6. Rep Power: 181292
Once again, someone who's more than willing to forceothersto give up their own wealth... Let me guess, he picked a random, round number conveniently above his own income level?

Then he babbles on, pretending that anyone who earns more than his imaginary line, must be stuffing the cash in a box under the bed, where it doesn't nothing for anyone. The lunacy of this article is mind bobbling.
post 1491272121 04-16-2017, 06:49 AM
-
#18
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2015
  4. Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Age: 29
  6. Posts: 1,311
  7. Rep Power: 5102
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
This isn't a discussion about acquisition, or rich people's work ethic, this is about questioning the ethics of hoard millions and billions of dollars while people starve to death.

Literally multi-millionaires and billionaires will have money in banks for years, not even using the wealth to make purchases, literally justhoarding it. Ethical?

(I'm going to avoid the statement about the profit motive, because that would turn this into a 'capitalism' debate.)
Heard of the concept of duality brah?one cannot exist without the other ie good without evil , rich without poor. Hoarding it is debateable lots of rich ppl giving back. The just sounds like some sort of soft version of communism assuming there will be no poverty if rich ppl give their money to be poor fyi thts why equality doesnt exist because we are all different in terms of biology, intellect, wealth. Assuming their will never be poverty is foolish and maybe look into india's class system ie not everyone in poverty thinks its a bad thing to be poor
post 1491272221 04-16-2017, 06:51 AM
-
#19
  1. Kiop
  2. ™gif me so i can gif you©
  1. Kiop
  2. ™gif me so i can gif you©
  3. Join Date: Nov 2015
  4. Posts: 55,724
  5. Rep Power: 222392
the guy in the video is right

"There is no way out, until you get awaire"

1.07-1.09

Awared until my fart get out from my nose
post 1491272261 04-16-2017, 06:52 AM
-
#20
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2015
  4. Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Age: 29
  6. Posts: 1,311
  7. Rep Power: 5102
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
This isn't a discussion about the wealth acquisition, this is a discussion about wealth retention.

Nor did the article propose legislation. This is a discussion ofethics, not economic or political theory.

This is a discussion of a voluntary wealth threshold.
Could turn that into a philosphical debate that ethics is subjective to the individual
post 1491272411 04-16-2017, 06:56 AM
-
#21
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By mCheech⏩
Taking away money after you earn it is no different than restricting acquisition.
It wouldn't be taken away.

The article is not proposing taking away money.

What the article is questioning is the ethics of hoarding millions or billions, when; it's not necessary to live comfortable life, and when it could be used to help people.

The author proposes a voluntary threshold of $100 K per person, and an extra $50k per child. Meaning a family of 3 would have a threshold of $250,000. And anything more than that would be given to charity.

Here is a summary of some research regarding income and happiness...

http://content.time.com/time/magazin...019628,00.html
If you work for the money and earn millions, you deserve every penny.
Again, it's not about acquisition. And I don't want to turn this into a debate about capitalism.

It's questioning the ethics of keeping money beyond a certain amount, while people starve to death around the world.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491272431 04-16-2017, 06:56 AM
-
#22
  1. nutsy54
  2. Random Words
  1. nutsy54
  2. Random Words
  3. Join Date: Apr 2003
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 126,581
  6. Rep Power: 181292
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
Literally multi-millionaires and billionaires will have money in banks for years, not even using the wealth to make purchases, literally just hoarding it.
Who are these multi-millioanires and billionaires you're so friendly with, that you peer into their bank accounts on a regular basis?

Do you even understand what happens when money is "in the bank"? Or the more likely usage, applied towards investments?
post 1491272571 04-16-2017, 06:59 AM
-
#23
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  1. mCheech
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Posts: 6,523
  5. Rep Power: 15235
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
It wouldn't be taken away.

The article is not proposing taking away money.

What the article is questioning is the ethics of hoarding millions or billions, when; it's not necessary to live comfortable life, and when it could be used to help people.

The author proposes a voluntary threshold of $100 K per person, and an extra $50k per child. Meaning a family of 3 would have a threshold of $250,000. And anything more than that would be given to charity.

Here is a summary of some research regarding income and happiness...

http://content.time.com/time/magazin...019628,00.html



Again, it's not about acquisition. And I don't want to turn this into a debate about capitalism.

It's questioning the ethics of keeping money beyond a certain amount, while people starve to death around the world.
Bs article. Im infinitely happier now making much more than 75k. I guess if you have zero hobbies, 75k could be fine.
post 1491272601 04-16-2017, 07:00 AM
-
#24
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  1. BigAlBrah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2015
  4. Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Age: 29
  6. Posts: 1,311
  7. Rep Power: 5102
Originally Posted By nutsy54⏩
Who are these multi-millioanires and billionaires you're so friendly with, that you peer into their bank accounts on a regular basis?

Do you even understand what happens when money is "in the bank"? Or the more likely usage, applied towards investments?
Bingo winner winner chicken dinner Op doesnt understand the principals of banks

Op heres one concept theres two units surplus (those investing funds) and deficit (those borrowing funds) if no one deposits money in banks from surplus units how will deficit units borrow funds for mortgages this is basic finance

edit: and i quote you say live a basic lifestyle well shelter is a necessity so how will people build houses or live in them without the investment of surplus units
post 1491272671 04-16-2017, 07:02 AM
-
#25
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩
Heard of the concept of dualitu brah?one cannot exist without the other ie good without evil , rich without poor.
I am poor in regards to the specific area where i live in the UK.

However I am very well off in comparison to the kind of circumstances found in African, Indian, Brazilian, and Phillipino slums.
The just sounds like some sort of soft version of communism
Noone is proposing legislation.

How is encouraging charity a form of communism? Plenty of libertarians/capitalists/neo-cons propose the concept of voluntary charity.
assuming there will be no poverty if rich ppl give their money to be poor fyi thts why equality doesnt exist because we are all different in terms of biology, intellect, wealth.
Noone is proposing equality.

Wanting to end poverty, is not the same as wanting everyone to have the same amount of wealth or possessions.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491272741 04-16-2017, 07:05 AM
-
#26
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By nutsy54⏩
Who are these multi-millioanires and billionaires you're so friendly with, that you peer into their bank accounts on a regular basis?

Do you even understand what happens when money is "in the bank"? Or the more likely usage, applied towards investments?
Avoiding a technical debate, and this is a genuine question, are you trying to say that there are no people whose personal wealth make them multi-millionaires or billionaires?
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491272801 04-16-2017, 07:06 AM
-
#27
  1. nzgs
  2. who is john galt?
  1. nzgs
  2. who is john galt?
  3. Join Date: Nov 2008
  4. Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Posts: 14,238
  6. Rep Power: 17400
Stupid drivel typical of the OP. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum. Wealth isn't a zero sum.

Take your high school socialism back to the R/P section and stay there.
post 1491272851 04-16-2017, 07:07 AM
-
#28
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩
Could turn that into a philosphical debate that ethics is subjective to the individual
Yep.

The question would still be worthwhile exploring IMO.

I question myself how much of my income to give to charity, and how much to keep.

It's essentially the same question.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491273181 04-16-2017, 07:12 AM
-
#29
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  1. BetaAsPhuck
  2. Wage Cuckin' It
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Posts: 34,506
  5. Rep Power: 127306
Originally Posted By nzgs⏩
Take your high school socialism back to the R/P section and stay there.
Noone is proposing legislation.

The article is proposing charity based on a voluntarily wealth threshold.

Socialism =/= voluntary charity.
If You Don't Like To Talk About Your Feelings, This Might Help...
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178926621

The Most Heartbreaking Thing That I've Learned About 'The Elite'.
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=178536851

Bitcoin And 'The Elite' - Why Bitcoin Is Not Revolutionary
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=179820783
post 1491273281 04-16-2017, 07:13 AM
-
#30
  1. yeshli2nuts
  2. Registered User
  1. yeshli2nuts
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Location: Florida, United States
  5. Age: 38
  6. Posts: 9,269
  7. Rep Power: 50332
OP, do you believe that more difficult jobs should get paid more than easier jobs? Who would choose to go to med school/residency for 8-12 years of their 20's and 30's, working 80+ hour weeks, to be paid the same amount of money as someone who mows lawns or mops floors 40 hours a week? If you pay everyone the same, no one will do the difficult jobs that society needs.
Never neg first but always neg back crew
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts