It's Basically Just Immoral To Be Rich

04-16-2017, 07:14 AM

-

#31

BigAlBrah
Registered User

BigAlBrah
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2015

Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Age: 29

Posts: 1,311

Rep Power: 5102

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

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.

Hoarding it is debateable lots of rich ppl giving back.

Noone is proposing legislation.

How is encouraging charity a form of communism? Plenty of libertarians/capitalists/neo-cons propose the concept of voluntary charity.

Noone is proposing equality.

Wanting to end poverty, is not the same as wanting everyone to have the same amount of wealth or possessions.

Didnt say charity isnt a form of communism but u do understand charities are run like businesses and alot of them dont do much at all. Address my finance statement then maybe make a rebuttal worth me responding

04-16-2017, 07:16 AM

-

#32

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By yeshli2nuts⏩

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.

Noone is proposing wealth equality.

Noone is proposing legislation.

04-16-2017, 07:19 AM

-

#33

BigAlBrah
Registered User

BigAlBrah
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2015

Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Age: 29

Posts: 1,311

Rep Power: 5102

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

Noone is proposing wealth equality.

Noone is proposing legislation.

Geez you start a thread with a source quoting " 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. " and you attempt to say that has nothing to do with wealth equality which it is because your attempting to cap everyones income thereby creating a more equal wealth system which is boody communism

04-16-2017, 07:21 AM

-

#34

3V0LUT10N
Registered User

3V0LUT10N
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2012

Posts: 102

Rep Power: 1346

What gives someone the right to force people to give up what is theirs? That is theft. Theft is immoral. Even if you think they have more than is necessary. It's just trying to use morality to justify theft.

04-16-2017, 07:22 AM

-

#35

nutsy54
Random Words

nutsy54
Random Words

Join Date: Apr 2003

Location: United States

Posts: 126,581

Rep Power: 181292

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

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?

Of course there are multimillionaire and billionaires. Why would you ask such an absurd question that has nothing to do with my post?

My questions specifically and directly asked about those you claim just stick their money in the bank and do nothing with it - especially since you don't seem to understand what happens to that money "in the bank". Hint: It's now a source for others to borrow from, to build their businesses, own a home, buy a car, etc.

04-16-2017, 07:24 AM

-

#36

nutsy54
Random Words

nutsy54
Random Words

Join Date: Apr 2003

Location: United States

Posts: 126,581

Rep Power: 181292

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

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

"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."

You "can keep" what the author decides you can keep, but you're "obligated to give away the excess". Doesn't sound like any definition of charity I've heard before.

04-16-2017, 07:25 AM

-

#37

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

Didnt say charity isnt a form of communism but u do understand charities are run like businesses and alot of them dont do much at all. Address my finance statement then maybe make a rebuttal worth me responding

I wasn't attempting a 'rebuttal' with that response.

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

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

Good question.

No offence intended OK.. Srs... But...

Ethical debates are not quick and easy, people propose problems like you've brought up, and that is addressed and discussed. Nuance is a part of any debate regarding ethics.

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

How much do you think would be required?

Pretending that you are on board with the concept: What do you think would be a practical wealth threshold limit?

(I'm asking you because you seem to know more about this subject that I do, I wouldn't be able to address anything you've written without doing research.)

Also,

Are you implying that a culture of minimalism and charity would crash our current economic system?

If that's the case (which I agree with) then I think it says that our economic system need consumerism,greed, and materialism to survive, and penalises (as a whole) minimalism and charity.

04-16-2017, 07:28 AM

-

#38

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By nutsy54⏩

"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."

You "can keep" what the author decides you can keep, but you're "obligated to give away the excess". Doesn't sound like any definition of charity I've heard before.

You've read the article (I'm assuming by quoting it, unless you just quote the OP) so you are aware that in nowhere in the article does the author propose legislation. And actually spends time at the beginning of the article stating that you can support capitalism, but be against hoarding wealth.

So you understand that those words, in context, are not proposing what you are implying (socialism).

Obligation can refer to ethical framework alone. Many religious people believe they are obliged to pray for example. And many people from various cultures believe they are obliged to feed guests.

"You can keep" refers to no ethical injunction, or compunction, to give away the money above the wealth threshold.

04-16-2017, 07:28 AM

-

#39

Ozzieturk
Sponsored by Colgate

Ozzieturk
Sponsored by Colgate

Join Date: Jan 2012

Posts: 1,483

Rep Power: 2861

I kinda agree.

It boggles my mind that people can buy a second/third/fourth house/car/boat w/e, while there are people dying left and right because they have no food and no water. If all these really rich people would bundle their strength, they'd make a big dent in poverty and improve the life of so many people. I'd wager that helping other people would bring you more joy and happiness aswell than materialistic stuff that's gonna depreciate and forgotten about. However the connection with and care for other people is just completely absent.

Then again I think, why is it their job to care for these people. Do all poor people deserve help? What would drive people to become rich, when they have to give it away. While admirable and positive, feels just wrong and unrealistic in the end. At least for now.

04-16-2017, 07:32 AM

-

#40

nutsy54
Random Words

nutsy54
Random Words

Join Date: Apr 2003

Location: United States

Posts: 126,581

Rep Power: 181292

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

You've read the article (I'm assuming by quoting it, unless you just quote the OP) so you are aware that in nowhere in the article does the author propose legislation. And actually spends time at the beginning of the article stating that you can support capitalism, but be against hoarding wealth.

So you understand that those words, in context, are not proposing what you are implying (socialism).

Obligation can refer to ethical framework alone. Many religious people believe they are obliged to pray for example. And many people from various cultures believe they are obliged to feed guests.

I didn't say anything about legislation

I've asked you multiple times to answer direct questions, and all you do is change the subject to things I never said. So it seems you don't want to have an honest discussion about this ridiculous article.

04-16-2017, 07:33 AM

-

#41

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By nutsy54⏩

Of course there are multimillionaire and billionaires. Why would you ask such an absurd question that has nothing to do with my post?

My questions specifically and directly asked about those you claim just stick their money in the bank and do nothing with it - especially since you don't seem to understand what happens to that money "in the bank". Hint: It's now a source for others to borrow from, to build their businesses, own a home, buy a car, etc.

I understand what fractional reserve banking is. If that's what you were referring to after 'hint'.

I don't know for certain that some people hoard money and do nothing with it (apart from Eckhart Tolle, who admitted that he has millions and does nothing with it). I'm betting that there are plenty of millionaires and billionaires who hoard money, for the sake of it.

No offence, but is that your entire point?

04-16-2017, 07:34 AM

-

#42

nutsy54
Random Words

nutsy54
Random Words

Join Date: Apr 2003

Location: United States

Posts: 126,581

Rep Power: 181292

Originally Posted By Ozzieturk⏩

I kinda agree.

It boggles my mind that people can buy a second/third/fourth house/car/boat w/e, while there are people dying left and right because they have no food and no water. If all these really rich people would bundle their strength, they'd make a big dent in poverty and improve the life of so many people.

Who built those homes/cars/boats you object to? Who maintains them, and benefits from all the associated purchases made during the lifetime of those homes/cars/boats?
Oh, that's right,people who are actually earning paychecks- based on income and business generated by the "really rich".

04-16-2017, 07:38 AM

-

#43

neilsabo
Registered User

neilsabo
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 5,905

Rep Power: 12782

The fact that the number the author came up with is 100k per person REEKS of privelege, holy **** lol

If they really believed what they were saying his number would be unbelievably low, like maybe in the 20s or even lower

04-16-2017, 07:39 AM

-

#44

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By nutsy54⏩

I didn't say anything about legislation

I've asked you multiple times to answer direct questions, and all you do is change the subject to things I never said. So it seems you don't want to have an honest discussion about this ridiculous article.

You wrote...

Doesn't sound like any definition of charity I've heard before.

I assumed you meant legislation.

Obligation is used a lot in the context of charity, in discussions about ethics (eg. charity is discussed as a religious obligation) so I didn't guess that you meant anything else.

You seem to be accusing me of willfully misinterpreting you, rather than having an honest misunderstanding.

I'm going to guess that you think what you think you've written was 'obvious'. My reply... Obligation is used in the context of charity a lot, based on my research into Islam, Christianity, and ethical philosophy, so it didn't seem unfamiliar to me.

04-16-2017, 07:39 AM

-

#45

BigAlBrah
Registered User

BigAlBrah
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2015

Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Age: 29

Posts: 1,311

Rep Power: 5102

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

I understand what fractional reserve banking is. If that's what you were referring to after 'hint'.

I don't know for certain that some people hoard money and do nothing with it (apart from Eckhart Tolle, who admitted that he has millions and does nothing with it).I'm betting that there are plenty of millionaires and billionaires who hoard money, for the sake of it.

No offence, but is that your entire point?

For the last time let me try to explain this its not like the money in billions or millions is in cash stored under their bed its in a bank which is an investment like me and nutsy stated banks need money because essentially they redistribute those funds to people whom borrow money. This is why the gfc sent shockwaves across the world because if the banks collapse everything collapses.

Lets say you have a bank you receive a billion dollars from say me i earn like 2% interest how are you able to function as a bank (like i said above banks are the lifeline of society) if you need to pay me interest. The answer is to use the funds i have deposit to issue loans thereby earning repayments on those loans which will pay off your interest on my deposit.
Edit: thereby the bank makes money, i make money and the person who borrow funds has a house to live in

Cliffs: rich ppl have money in bank
banks need money to lend
ppl need to borrow money

04-16-2017, 07:42 AM

-

#46

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

Geez you start a thread with a source quoting " 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. " and you attempt to say that has nothing to do with wealth equality which it is because your attempting to cap everyones income thereby creating a more equal wealth system which is boody communism

Please read my last response to nusty.

I realize now that it's the langauge of the article that seems to be influence people to misinterpret things (ie. proposing communism).

04-16-2017, 07:45 AM

-

#47

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

Cliffs: rich ppl have money in bank
banks need money to lend
ppl need to borrow money

I just said that I understand what fractional researve banking is, there was no need to explain it to me.

I also asked you a series of questions, that lead from what you've just written.

04-16-2017, 07:48 AM

-

#48

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By 3V0LUT10N⏩

What gives someone the right to force people to give up what is theirs? That is theft. Theft is immoral. Even if you think they have more than is necessary. It's just trying to use morality to justify theft.

Noone is proposing force (legislation).

04-16-2017, 07:49 AM

-

#49

BigAlBrah
Registered User

BigAlBrah
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2015

Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Age: 29

Posts: 1,311

Rep Power: 5102

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

Please read my last response to nusty.

I realize now that it's the langauge of the article that seems to be influence people to misinterpret things (ie. proposing communism).

Maybe read the article you post new time and fyi just looked at the wealth of the catholic church brb $8 billion worth of assets don't u think they could downsize their assets such as the vatican maybe sell off alot of the gold and give it to the poor

oooooh wait they wouldnt do tht

04-16-2017, 07:50 AM

-

#50

gwem32170191
Registered User

gwem32170191
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: United States

Age: 39

Posts: 9,669

Rep Power: 44862

-Money is not what things are worth.
-Money is a unit by which things are traded.

Pick both.

I do not think it is possible to have OP's utopia without actually getting rid of money entirely. Why try to balance out an artificial system full of bugs and holes?

OP, philosophical question for you: Is it morally acceptable to ever stop helping your fellow man?

We have the saying "Time is money", so should we institute a moral limit to the amount of time you can spend for yourself on this earth? You live 80 years, you only get 20 for yourself because that's all you should need to do everything you wanted right?

04-16-2017, 07:51 AM

-

#51

getz1
Registered User

getz1
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2010

Age: 50

Posts: 2,877

Rep Power: 14384

I paid a 120k in taxes for 2016 and I am not a 10k/day CEO type. The government certainly gets into the deeper pockets, and I'll tell you right now that you cap me at 250k/yr earning and I will drop my hours to the point that I make 250k on the nose. Not going to work my balls off to give away every dollar past that. This is just more silly ****. I employ 4 people as well and pay them very fairly. Those jobs would go away with my new work hours and a salary cap.

04-16-2017, 07:53 AM

-

#52

iifymbro
Registered User

iifymbro
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2015

Location: United States

Age: 37

Posts: 21,395

Rep Power: 112562

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 just hoarding it. Ethical?

(I'm going to avoid the statement about the profit motive, because that would turn this into a 'capitalism' debate.)

Here you talk about multi-millionaires/billionaires except the article put forth 100k a person and you said you agreed.

04-16-2017, 07:56 AM

-

#53

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

Maybe read the article you post new time

I'm assuming you're referring to this part...

"And whether or notwe should raise the tax rates, or cap CEO pay, or rearrange the economic system,we should all be able to acknowledge, before we discuss anything else, that it is immoral to be rich. That much is clear. "[/I][/B]

(Please note the underlined.)

Ominous? Yep.

Proposing legsislation? No

However, you are insinuating that it is proposing leglistation, so please quote the article where the author does that, in case I didn't quote the relevant part.

[QUOTE]and fyi just looked at the wealth of the catholic church brb $8 billion worth of assets don't u think they could downsize their assets such as the vatican maybe sell off alot of the gold and give it to the poor

oooooh wait they wouldnt do tht[/QUOTE]Why did you bring that up lol?

To answer though, I think they are spitting on the name of Jesus by hoarding that wealth.

04-16-2017, 07:56 AM

-

#54

Bolz
Registered User

Bolz
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2015

Age: 38

Posts: 966

Rep Power: 1343

How can people even be this stupid?

It's immoral to intrude into people's lives and tell them what to think, how to act, and how much money they can morally possess.

Communism, and to a lesser degree socialism, decrease incentive to succeed and perform well as a society. There's no reason to try and innovate or work hard if there's no benefit to doing so. Look past your bleeding heart and use your brain for once.

04-16-2017, 07:57 AM

-

#55

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By iifymbro⏩

Here you talk about multi-millionaires/billionaires except the article put forth 100k a person and you said you agreed.

So?

04-16-2017, 07:58 AM

-

#56

3V0LUT10N
Registered User

3V0LUT10N
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2012

Posts: 102

Rep Power: 1346

Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩

Noone is proposing force (legislation).

So people who wish to keep their money are free to? When it talks about what is "allowed" that would imply there is going to be a governing body involved.

04-16-2017, 08:00 AM

-

#57

BigAlBrah
Registered User

BigAlBrah
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2015

Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Age: 29

Posts: 1,311

Rep Power: 5102

[QUOTE=BetaAsPhuck post_id=1491276111]I'm assuming you're referring to this part...

[b][u] "And whether or not[/u][/b]we should raise the tax rates, or cap CEO pay, or rearrange the economic system,[u]we should all be able to acknowledge, before we discuss anything else[/u], that it is immoral to be rich. That much is clear. "[/I][/B]

(Please note the underlined.)

Ominous? Yep.

Proposing legsislation? No

However, you are insinuating that it is proposing leglistation, so please quote the article where the author does that, in case I didn't quote the relevant part.

[b]Why did you bring that up lol?[/b]

To answer though, I think they are spitting on the name of Jesus by hoarding that wealth.[/QUOTE]Because you spit all this convo about charities when most known charities are christian based and the catholic church sets an example for charitial behaviour and u just said they hoard their wealth lmao

04-16-2017, 08:01 AM

-

#58

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By gwem32170191⏩

OP, philosophical question for you: Is it morally acceptable to ever stop helping your fellow man?

I think so.

04-16-2017, 08:02 AM

-

#59

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

BetaAsPhuck
Wage Cuckin' It

Join Date: Mar 2014

Posts: 34,506

Rep Power: 127306

Originally Posted By BigAlBrah⏩

Because you spit all this convo about charities when most known charities are christian based

So?

and the catholic church sets an example for charitial behaviour and u just said they hoard their wealth lmao

So?