Mocking The Poor

[Calm]

I'm a citizen by birth. Moreover I actually like the fact that my government makes rules and laws that allow me the freedom to act in concert with other citizens to do things like promote the general welfare and provide for the common defense. To even change those rules and laws when so desired. So I stay here by choice.

 

I'm not that far from the Mexican border, and can drive to the Canadian border in a little over a day and a half. Unfortunately they have taxes in both those countries too. I have enough assets to live pretty much where I want to. Though not necessarily in the style I want to live once I get there.

I have lived in Canada, it is not that easy to become a citizen of it.

You having options does not demonstrate that everyone has options.

[Duncan]

Are you a fan of Downton Abbey? Do you like the divisions we have in society?

This Earth was created for all of us and we all have equal rights to everything here, regardless of what the rich and powerful in this world would like you to believe.

But Im okay with washing someone elses windows if someone else washes mine too.

 

no but I LOVE british TV and no

 

But I would rather work for my money then steal it 

[mercyngrace]

This is a minor derail to my own thread but given the discussions on economics, I thought it might bring a chuckle (or raised eyebrow) depending on your perspective.

 

In Sunday School, we were discussing something and D&C 49:20 came up:

 

20 But it is not given that one man should ^apossess that which is above another, wherefore the ^bworld lieth in ^csin.

 

 

Without any commentary from the teacher, the teenagers in the class were completely horrified. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen them so animated. Responses ranged from "Well that can't be right. Capitalism is the Lord's way." to "Maybe when the Lord comes again, he'll institute that kind of thing but we can't possibly live that way now."  

 

I suppose a cursory glance at Acts and 4 Nephi validates that fact. We can't live that way. At least not for long. 

[thesometimesaint]

I have lived in Canada, it is not that easy to become a citizen of it.

You having options does not demonstrate that everyone has options.

 

There are ex-pats in practically every country on earth. I said nothing about becoming a citizen, just a place to live.

 

I never said everyone did. But if they have two functioning legs they can walk. Some of the biggest migrations in history have been people picking up and moving even if they had very limited resources to do it. IE; The migrations of poor blacks out of the South after the US Civil War.

[thesometimesaint]

This is a minor derail to my own thread but given the discussions on economics, I thought it might bring a chuckle (or raised eyebrow) depending on your perspective.

 

In Sunday School, we were discussing something and D&C 49:20 came up:

 

 

Without any commentary from the teacher, the teenagers in the class were completely horrified. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen them so animated. Responses ranged from "Well that can't be right. Capitalism is the Lord's way." to "Maybe when the Lord comes again, he'll institute that kind of thing but we can't possibly live that way now."  

 

I suppose a cursory glance at Acts and 4 Nephi validates that fact. We can't live that way. At least not for long. 

 

I learned at these fancy psychotherapy modalities in school. The real world taught me differently.

[bluebell]

As a citizen of this country you volunteered to pay taxes, by force, if necessary.

 

And if it got to the point where it was not doing me any good to make money because of those taxes, i would either leave, or stop making so much money.

[thesometimesaint]

And if it got to the point where it was not doing me any good to make money because of those taxes, i would either leave, or stop making so much money.

 

You've been reading too much Ayn Rand. I don't know of any business whom decreases their business just to avoid taxes. Businesses rise and fall on demand for their product/service.

[The Nehor]

Are you a fan of Downton Abbey? Do you like the divisions we have in society?.

I think they don't go far enough. This world needs decisive leadership. The world is a mess and i just need to rule it. The main problem with democracy is it makes it very hard to become 'dictator for life'. I feel like my potential is being squashed. It is so undemocratic,

[Ahab]

So you would take away enough money so they cannot be in control of their own lives and make their own choices and instead force them to work or starve....and this is moral for what reason?

They would be in the same boat as everyone else who works for a living.

Im just talking about taking the excess away from the rich, unless theyve already given it away to the poor. And it is morally right to treat everyone in the same boat the same way instead of giving special treatment and special favors to the people we normally refer to as the "rich".

[why me]

 

 

Without any commentary from the teacher, the teenagers in the class were completely horrified. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen them so animated. Responses ranged from "Well that can't be right. Capitalism is the Lord's way." to "Maybe when the Lord comes again, he'll institute that kind of thing but we can't possibly live that way now."  

 

I suppose a cursory glance at Acts and 4 Nephi validates that fact. We can't live that way. At least not for long. 

Many teenagers are now incorporated into capitalist ideology. They have learned that there is no alternative to such an ideolgoy through their schooling and through the media. So such responses are of no surprise. The last response we have even seen on this thread. And if one thinks about it what alternative can we offer them? More charity, more compassion, more empathy? Which are all good. But to combat capitalist schooling and capitalist values one must have an alternative ideology to offer. Which is?

[why me]

ai

They would be in the same boat as everyone else who works for a living.

Im just talking about taking the excess away from the rich, unless theyve already given it away to the poor. And it is morally right to treat everyone in the same boat the same way instead of giving special treatment and special favors to the people we normally refer to as the "rich".

This does not seem to be a solution. The rich giving money to the poor is certainly not a solution since when the money runs out, the people will still be poor. Capitalism has a Titanic mentality where people live in different sections of the boat. And people are treated differently on this boat. And when the ship sinks....the rich jump ship into a life boat while the rest scatter for a life preserver. 2008 is a case in point.

Edited January 8, 2014 by why me

[Ahab]

I think they don't go far enough. This world needs decisive leadership. The world is a mess and i just need to rule it. The main problem with democracy is it makes it very hard to become 'dictator for life'. I feel like my potential is being squashed. It is so undemocratic,

Would you promise to not fire off any nuclear weapons? And not harm, maim or kill in any other way, generally, except to people who really deserve it and have been convicted of harming others?

Im toying with the idea of giving everyone or at least most people a day to be dictator for a day, but I havent quite worked out the best WY to make it good and fair for everyone yet.

[Ahab]

ai

This does not seem to be a solution. The rich giving money to the poor is certainly not a solution since when the money runs out, the people will still be poor. Capitalism has a Titanic mentality where people live in different sections of the boat. And people are treated differently on this boat. And when the ship sinks....the rich jump ship into a life boat while the rest scatter for a life preserver. 2008 is a case in point.

Money circulates, so it never runs out as long as we replace the old bills with new ones, and we can easily get rid of the class distinctions of rich vs poor as soon as we want to. We just have to want to. All it takes is to give a poor person enough money so that he or she is not poor anymore, with the poor person spending that money to put it back into circulation.

[why me]

Lets look at it this way: The salvation Army was created to help those who were victims of social darwinism, a rugged form of capitalism that equated human existence to the animal kingdom---the survival of the fittest. The salvation army gave birth to a social gospel as an opposite to social darwinism. The salvation army is still around to help those who are still victims of such a darwinist system.

 

And yet, in the long term the salvation army has been a failure because it cannot oppose the system that gave it its birth.

Edited January 9, 2014 by why me

[why me]

Money circulates, so it never runs out as long as we replace the old bills with new ones, and we can easily get rid of the class distinctions of rich vs poor as soon as we want to. We just have to want to. All it takes is to give a poor person enough money so that he or she is not poor anymore, with the poor person spending that money to put it back into circulation.

Hardly. The poor cease to be poor when work is available in the form of jobs. When people have a secure place of work that gives a decent wage. And society stresses the social at the expense of capital. Capitalism is all about finance, money, investments, stocks etc. No social in the definition and this is the problem with the system. It is centered in capital. Thus, we have immense social ills.

[Ahab]

Lets look at it this way: The salvation Army was created to help those who were victims of social darwinism, a rugged form of capitalism that equated human existence to the animal kingdom---the survival of the fittest. The salvation army gave birth to a social gospel as an opposite to social darwinism. The salvation army is still around to help those who are still victims of such a darwinist system.

And yet, in the long term that salvation army has been a failure because it cannot oppose the system that gave it its birth.

We just need people to give more charitably, and when not enough people do, we need to act more charitably in behalf of everyones best interest.

Allowing the greedy and selfish rich to have most of this worlds resources is not the solution, and we can reasonably expect the greedy and selfish rich to not want to share what they believe is only for them.

[The Nehor]

Instead of mocking the poor we should consider the drastic solution the British Prime Minister looked at:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_yg

[bluebell]

You've been reading too much Ayn Rand. I don't know of any business whom decreases their business just to avoid taxes. Businesses rise and fall on demand for their product/service.

I've never read anything by Rand.

And I wasn't talking about businesses.

It's a fact however that if a country demands taxes at a steep enough rate, productivity will decrease. This is because such taxes take the reward away from making money. And people don't work unless there is some kind of reward attached.

There comes a point where the energy used to make the money isn't worth the amount of money the person is making.

[bluebell]

Double post deleted.

Edited January 8, 2014 by bluebell

[Ahab]

Hardly. The poor cease to be poor when work is available in the form of jobs. When people have a secure place of work that gives a decent wage. And society stresses the social at the expense of capital. Capitalism is all about finance, money, investments, stocks etc. No social in the definition and this is the problem with the system. It is centered in capital. Thus, we have immense social ills.

Try to see things from the paradigm of a rich person who is primarily focused on his own self interest.

When you have a lot of money and a lot of other people dont, but will work for it, the deck is stacked in your favor. When you want something you can get it with some of your money, and the poorer another person is the less money you will have to give to get it.

Do you seriously believe a rich person wants to pay another person a lot of money to provide a service? Or do you believe a rich person has sympathy or compassion for a person who will provide a service for the least amount of money possible?

Rich people right now are living in the lap of luxury with their money being sought after by more and more people who arent doing as well, financially. Why would they want anything any different than it already is? If anything, theyd rather give up even less of their money and have even more people catering to their whims and pleasures. And of course they expect you to be thankful for being chosen to serve them, for money.

[Duncan]

Try to see things from the paradigm of a rich person who is primarily focused on his own self interest.

When you have a lot of money and a lot of other people dont, but will work for it, the deck is stacked in your favor. When you want something you can get it with some of your money, and the poorer another person is the less money you will have to give to get it.

Do you seriously believe a rich person wants to pay another person a lot of money to provide a service? Or do you believe a rich person has sympathy or compassion for a person who will provide a service for the least amount of money possible?

Rich people right now are living in the lap of luxury with their money being sought after by more and more people who arent doing as well, financially. Why would they want anything any different than it already is? If anything, theyd rather give up even less of their money and have even more people catering to their whims and pleasures. And of course they expect you to be thankful for being chosen to serve them, for money.

 

 

I think some rich people would prefer to do most services themselves (like window washing at night when no one can see them, think Hyacinth Boo-Kay) and then if necessary pay as cheap as possible for what services they can't or won't. Some rich people are great and help others out and give tips and whatnot and give what they have (think Bill Gates buying computers for others and donating cash to others and stuff and things)

[Calm]

There are ex-pats in practically every country on earth. I said nothing about becoming a citizen, just a place to live.

 

I never said everyone did. But if they have two functioning legs they can walk. Some of the biggest migrations in history have been people picking up and moving even if they had very limited resources to do it. IE; The migrations of poor blacks out of the South after the US Civil War.

Walking isn't all that is required nowadays. One has to show one has a stable source of income, etc.

[Calm]

They would be in the same boat as everyone else who works for a living.

Im just talking about taking the excess away from the rich, unless theyve already given it away to the poor. And it is morally right to treat everyone in the same boat the same way instead of giving special treatment and special favors to the people we normally refer to as the "rich".

Taking money away from the rich is giving them special treatment.

Who gets to judge who the rich are?

[Calm]

Money circulates, so it never runs out as long as we replace the old bills with new ones, and we can easily get rid of the class distinctions of rich vs poor as soon as we want to. We just have to want to. All it takes is to give a poor person enough money so that he or she is not poor anymore, with the poor person spending that money to put it back into circulation.

What the poor person chooses to spend his money on would determine if he stays poor and needs more bailouts or becomes independent and can care for himself and family. Just giving money is no guarantee.

[Calm]

Try to see things from the paradigm of a rich person who is primarily focused on his own self interest.

When you have a lot of money and a lot of other people dont, but will work for it, the deck is stacked in your favor. When you want something you can get it with some of your money, and the poorer another person is the less money you will have to give to get it.

Do you seriously believe a rich person wants to pay another person a lot of money to provide a service? Or do you believe a rich person has sympathy or compassion for a person who will provide a service for the least amount of money possible?

Rich people right now are living in the lap of luxury with their money being sought after by more and more people who arent doing as well, financially. Why would they want anything any different than it already is? If anything, theyd rather give up even less of their money and have even more people catering to their whims and pleasures. And of course they expect you to be thankful for being chosen to serve them, for money.

How many rich people do you actually know?

I've met a few millionaires and they were very compassionate and concerned about others. In fact, it was one of the reasons that drove them to become rich....because they felt great responsibility to ensure that the people they employed still had their jobs the next day. Their anxiety about this drove them to work excessive hours and look for new ways to bring income into their companies.

Undoubtedly there are a number of rich who treat others like you say, I suspect there are even a number of the middle class and poor who do as well. Selfishness is unfortunately not limited to the rich.

Where is the compassion and empathy for the rich person? Why assume the worst for him or her and the best for the poor? Why not take each case by case with compassion and an interest in the individual as opposed to some stereotype we have assumed about them?

Edited January 9, 2014 by calmoriah