• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Do the rich steal from the poor? Capitalism

Ernestrome

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Messages
1,822
Can you get rich without profiting from other peoples work?

If there are counter-examples, ie ways to get rich without having profited from other people's work, how atypical are they?




[Again, this question is a little vague but if it's very unclear I will elaborate in a few posts time, I'm sure your answers will help me with things i need to clarify.]
 
Money is valuable because you can buy other peoples work.

Even if you provide a service, you still use a computer that someone built, an office that someone built, and clothes that someone made. None of those people get a share of your profits beyond your initial investment.
 
Sure, use high leverage and place a few correct short trades..then go ahead and invest long in equities.

Call the market, basically..
 
yes, capatlism is completely unbalanced in this way

our material richness in the west is a result of exploiting both the natural world (and not giving back what we took, but just taking taking taking) and exploiting the third world/poorer people (same thing, not giving back)

the sooner it all crumbles the better... imo

(and yes, i'm ready to give it allll up for simple living)

'live simply, so others can simply live'
 
I often wish that my only responsibilities in life were to survive - build shelter, get food, etc. Sure, physical life would be harder, but I'm pretty positive I would be content, able to live life moment-to-moment and enjoy it for the experience. The sort of life I have to lead by being a part of this society makes it very hard for me to do this and sometimes it's just so hard to keep going, and just for worrying about money and a bunch of other crap that only matters to me because it has to in order to survive. I prefer physical hardship to emotional and mental hardship... it's easy to resolve. I would only have to worry about things that I could work immediately to resolve (like food and shelter), and then once they're done you're worry-free. But I worry about concepts like having enough money and feeling like I have to worry about whether I'm spending my time productively or wasting time, things that can't ever really be satisfactorily resolved because they're just ideas built on some societal expectation that other people have of you.

I do hope that's where we're headed, towards simpler living. I feel like it has to be because it seems the current system can only last so long... it seems to be rotting from within.

The heart or one of the hearts of this disease seems to be money, which could be said to just be a measure of "buying" someone's service. People accumulate this credit towards future service, to gain power over other people. They can do this because everyone wants this thing, since it allows you to have things that you didn't have to produce, and accumulate food and shelter and other necessities. So people model their actions to best accumulate more money, which creates a power hierarchy since some people have it and some need it. So the ones who have it ultimately define the terms by which those who need it can have it. People can use this influence for good or for ill, but unfortunately it seems like this lifestyle often creates a separation of the individual from the sense of responsiblitity or maybe even the reality of causing harm or hardship to others. I believe today it's called capitalism. A relatively few people are milking the masses, mashing away at the machine.

This leads to factions in the ranks of humans... eventually they form countries and religious groups. They fight over "money" and usually influence the masses by creating a "moral" reason (perhaps religious) for the war. This seems to have been building since it's roots and doesn't really seem sustainable long-term because it's inherently self-destructive.
 
Oh, the rationalizations the poor will come up with for their envy of the rich.

Let's raise taxes on those people who add the most value!
 
Oh, the rationalizations the poor will come up with for their envy of the rich.

Let's raise taxes on those people who add the most value!

Are you saying that's a bad idea? Why? The rich can afford to pay more because even if they make a little less, they're still way more than fine to survive comfortably, and society ends up reaping more benefit as a whole from that person because we're getting a larger percentage of large amounts of money. The poor have a hard time just keeping afloat in society as is. :\
 
now that all our worry

has proved to be

such an un-lucrative business

why don't we...

FIND A BETTER JOB

~hafiz, 12thC sufi mystic
 
Yes, I'm saying that's a HORRENDOUS idea.

You think we'd all have these neat little laptops with which to have this discussion, if, hypothetically, the people who had the intelligence, the persistence and willingness to take risks to try to invent the laptop KNEW BEFOREHAND that even IF they WERE successful in inventing the laptop, that most of their profits would be essentially stolen from them so that the unintelligent, the lazy, and the risk-averse could legally gain value without giving up anything in exchange??
 
I'm not sure of your current financial situation love life, but what is being said is that if you have 10 million dollars in the bank, and you have to pay 500,000 in taxes, its not going to make them try any less hard at keeping themselves rich. If anything, they will work even harder to make sure they can stay a millionaire. NO matter what the tax rate is. The rest of us are working for next to nothing. They create all these divisions like middle class, upper middle class but almost 90% of the wealth in this country is controlled by the top 1%. Yes it needs to change.
 
Why oh why do so many people still opine that you should be entitled to what you "need" without having to exchange anything in return?

In far away lands, and many centuries ago, I might even shed a tear.

But in the USA 2009, even in this horrendous economy, if you're one of the 90-plus percent of people with an 80-plus IQ and all of your limbs, and you can't feed and clothe yourself, you're either lazy or irresponsible, or both.

Be creative.

Think of a way that YOU can utilize your strengths to ADD VALUE and then work your ass off.

This is not rocket science.
 
lovelife you're right but off topic. You're not substantively engaging the critique people are putting out there. Enjoy your self satisfying rationalizations.
 
Why oh why do so many people still opine that you should be entitled to what you "need" without having to exchange anything in return?

In far away lands, and many centuries ago, I might even shed a tear.

But in the USA 2009, even in this horrendous economy, if you're one of the 90-plus percent of people with an 80-plus IQ and all of your limbs, and you can't feed and clothe yourself, you're either lazy or irresponsible, or both.

Be creative.

Think of a way that YOU can utilize your strengths to ADD VALUE and then work your ass off.

This is not rocket science.

I'm guessing you've never been on the bottom. maybe I'm wrong - if so, sorry for assuming.

The point you're missing is that everyone should be paying what they can towards the common good - that's the basis of our system of government. The rich can afford to pay more - it's better for our system. It's what our system was built on. The entire reason we have society is to pull everyone up by everyone else and make a better life for us all. Or at least that's the way it should be and has been theorized to be. But it's because of people like you that it's become unbalanced. If you want to hoard all of your money to yourself, then go start your own country on an island somewhere. If you're a part of this society, you should be supporting it, because it sure as hell allowed you to get rich in the first place, more than likely. And it's a plain and simple fact that the rich can afford to give more support. Who the hell cares if someone with 100 million dollars has to give a few million more? It's a drop in the bucket. The way I see it, if you'd rather have an extra few million dollars on top of your already extreme amounts of wealth so you can have a few extra amenites, at the expense of the quality of life of other people, you've lost touch with what makes us human. If the tax percentage is raised for the rich, they'll all still work at least as hard to contribute to and advance society - why would you think they'd work less hard? And the poor will work just as hard or harder if they feel like they actually might be able to get somewhere.
 
Apology accepted for assuming.

I've been quite wealthy and I've been quite poor - such is life when one makes a nice income, has zero dependents, but has a penchant for for "investing on margin" (read: "gambling") on risky NASDAQ tech upstarts.

But my personal situation is completely beside the point.

The point is, SURE, in a vacuum, overall utility might actually rise if the billionaire is taxed at a much higher rate than the pauper.

But that neglects three extremely important things:

(1) That the billionaire entrepreneur *IS* discouraged from taking risks when the tax on his potential successes are dramatically increased - and these are risks that when he takes them, and they are successful, benefit EVERYONE;

and

(2) It simply IS NOT FAIR.

I've never met either one of them in my life, but I would bet just about anything that Bill and Melinda Gates feel a whole lot better about all of the help they do because they got to CHOOSE to donate humongous amounts of money, rather than if the exact same amount of money was STOLEN from them by poor people (via the government, of course) through ridiculously high taxes on the successful.

and

(3) Further, when people who NEED actually CONTRIBUTE (anything - make a product, sell a service, write a song, play the trumpet on the subway platform, ask someone for help POLITELY and actually contribute utility via politeness - ANYTHING), I guarantee you that they feel a whole lot better about themselves than if they were to receive the money by government handout.

As to your statement that "everyone should be paying what they can toward the common good," that's a fine personal opinion to have, but your opinion, in my opinion, does NOT give the government the right to play Robin Hood.

I thought that this past century has shown that, even with its flaws, Capitalism is CLEARLY preferable to any other economic system that's been tried.

And as to the original thread title of "Do The Rich Seal From The Poor," I would answer this:

SOME rich people/corporations do indeed take advantage of SOME of the less sophisticated, and that is a shame.

But for every one of those people and corporations, I can point to a boatload of people (professional entertainers, people/corporations who are ethical and actually DO NOT take advantage of the poor, and who actually treat their employees well, because they feel better about themselves by doing so - the list goes on and on and on).

And as to taxing the rich SLIGHTLY more, just so we can give the lazy and the irresponsible enough so they won't start a revolution, I personally consider that to be self-defense - a coerced "choice" by the successful to give out hand-outs so that evil envious people will have less incentive to do evil things to those whom they envy.

And thanks for the "enjoy your self satisfying rationalizations" in your post to me, Shakti - was that you "substantively engaging" this conversation, or, alternatively, just a cheap ad-hom?
 
They create all these divisions like middle class, upper middle class but almost 90% of the wealth in this country is controlled by the top 1%. Yes it needs to change.

This is wrong, I read a paper from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and I believe the statistic read that 30% of US wealth is controlled by the top 1%.
I am not entirely sure, I will back that up accordingly. If you have a source to back your claim, let me see it.


Lovelife, you seem to make some substantive points. To add on, a free market relies heavily on innovation. Innovation is supposed to keep monopolies and oligopolies in check. Those firms or individuals without wealth, therefore, have an opportunity through R&D/innovation/etc to obtain it.

Is this going to turn into capitalism vs socialism? Maybe..
 
(3) Further, when people who NEED actually CONTRIBUTE (anything - make a product, sell a service, write a song, play the trumpet on the subway platform, ask someone for help POLITELY and actually contribute utility via politeness - ANYTHING), I guarantee you that they feel a whole lot better about themselves than if they were to receive the money by government handout.

It seems that you're equating poor people with being lazy, which is not always the case. I'm not talking about welfare and government handouts here. I'm talking about the way that taxpayer money goes into the infrastructure of our society, building roads, better schools, and so forth, things that benefit everyone who is a part of the society. Whether the welfare system is correct is another discussion entirely, I think. There are a lot of people who do contribute their part to society and are still struggling hard, and to tax them more because a rich person wants to keep a little extra of their money that they don't even need all of to have whatever they want or need (whereas the struggling person does need all of theirs just to barely survive) is just kind of fucked up. That's my opinion at least.

I appreciate that you're taking the time to respond intelligently, and you definitely bring up good points, but I just don't agree with the way you're looking at it. I think that living your life thinking only of your own personal gain is what's sending the world to shit, and has been throughout history. If we don't change that, we'll die out eventually... I can't see how we can sustain the way we're heading indefinitely.

SOME rich people/corporations do indeed take advantage of SOME of the less sophisticated, and that is a shame.

But for every one of those people and corporations, I can point to a boatload of people (professional entertainers, people/corporations who are ethical and actually DO NOT take advantage of the poor, and who actually treat their employees well, because they feel better about themselves by doing so - the list goes on and on and on).

Good point to bring up. But you concede that it happens, and that that is wrong?

I do think that the raising of taxes on the poor to lower those of the rich is such an oppression. Sure, the people proposing it are not trying to oppress anyone... they're just trying to make a better life for themselves. But the oppression ends up happening anyway, and is the "better life" even necessary? Look at all the horror in the world (and you can't possibly tell me that all of the poverty and hunger in the world is caused by laziness). How much of it could be solved simply by distribution of resources from the few to the many? Not even to the extent that the rich wouldn't be rich... just somewhat less rich.

Just so you know, I've been on both ends too. My family is quite well-off. My dad only votes republican because he owns a business and doesn't want his taxes raised. Now that I'm on my own completely I'm not having as easy of a time and I'm seeing the other side of things. I don't take welfare and I sure as hell work as hard as I can to contribute... I don't just plug away at some useless work that doesn't get anyone anywhere. Yet I'm still struggling hard, while I see a certain small percentage of people, many of whom contribute very little to the progression of humanity (although certainly some do), hoarding it all for themselves while I struggle. And even more importantly, while other people, who also struggle, go hungry and homeless. If you think that everyone in that situation is lazy, you're very sadly mistaken.
 
It seems that you're equating poor people with being lazy, which is not always the case. I'm not talking about welfare and government handouts here. I'm talking about the way that taxpayer money goes into the infrastructure of our society, building roads, better schools, and so forth, things that benefit everyone who is a part of the society. Whether the welfare system is correct is another discussion entirely, I think. There are a lot of people who do contribute their part to society and are still struggling hard, and to tax them more because a rich person wants to keep a little extra of their money that they don't even need all of to have whatever they want or need (whereas the struggling person does need all of theirs just to barely survive) is just kind of fucked up. That's my opinion at least.

I appreciate that you're taking the time to respond intelligently, and you definitely bring up good points, but I just don't agree with the way you're looking at it. I think that living your life thinking only of your own personal gain is what's sending the world to shit, and has been throughout history. If we don't change that, we'll die out eventually... I can't see how we can sustain the way we're heading indefinitely.



Good point to bring up. But you concede that it happens, and that that is wrong?

I do think that the raising of taxes on the poor to lower those of the rich is such an oppression. Sure, the people proposing it are not trying to oppress anyone... they're just trying to make a better life for themselves. But the oppression ends up happening anyway, and is the "better life" even necessary? Look at all the horror in the world (and you can't possibly tell me that all of the poverty and hunger in the world is caused by laziness). How much of it could be solved simply by distribution of resources from the few to the many? Not even to the extent that the rich wouldn't be rich... just somewhat less rich.

Just so you know, I've been on both ends too. My family is quite well-off. My dad only votes republican because he owns a business and doesn't want his taxes raised. Now that I'm on my own completely I'm not having as easy of a time and I'm seeing the other side of things. I don't take welfare and I sure as hell work as hard as I can to contribute... I don't just plug away at some useless work that doesn't get anyone anywhere. Yet I'm still struggling hard, while I see a certain small percentage of people, many of whom contribute very little to the progression of humanity (although certainly some do), hoarding it all for themselves while I struggle. And even more importantly, while other people, who also struggle, go hungry and homeless. If you think that everyone in that situation is lazy, you're very sadly mistaken.

I agree with your sentiments. I do not have a problem with people being rich. I think everyone should be rich. I have a problem with some people, being extraordinarily rich, whilst others live and die in poverty. If there was no one without a home, or no children without food, then the richest people could have all the gold and exotic cars they pleased, because everyone would have access to what I consider basic needs.

And in the long term, I think that meeting the basic needs for everyone is beneficial to everyone, even the rich people benefit even as they will pay more per capita.

Through co-operative communities we can build the greatest futures.
 
Xorkoth, first of all, thank you for continuing this discussion in a civil manner.

Second, I empathize with your situation - in fact, a few years ago, I made a conscious decision to largely get out of a very lucrative business in exchange for getting to enjoy a much more satisfying (albeit MUCH lower paying) one - and as a result of that decision combined with living in one of the most expensive cities in the world, I'm not exactly wealthy right now either, despite working nearly a hundred hours a week (while admittedly, I *LOVE* my primary job so much that those 50-ish hours hardly feel like "work").

In any case, YES, I agree with you that many people such as you and me (and many others who may not have had the advantages that you and I were fortunate to have; i.e., upper-middle class to wealthy parents) work our asses off just to pay the bills.

But I still fail to see why any of us should be entitled to reap the rewards of other people's hard work/entrepreneurial spirit/great ideas/good fortune.

During those times in which I had more money than I knew what to do with, I was extremely generous with the money I didn't NEED because I recognized that my 500,000th to 500,020th dollars meant a whole lot less to me than they would to a considerate but unfortunately less-wealthy person who could use those twenty (twenty-one, math nerds ;)) dollars to buy himself a nice meal, and I'm guessing that you, too, are a non-self-centered human being who would also CHOOSE to help out the less fortunate.

Do I look down with scorn at the many multimillionaires I see hoarding their wealth, when they know goddamn well that they could help a whole lot of people who try to contribute, but who, through no fault of their own, were born into circumstances less fortunate than ours (or theirs)?

Sure.

But, in my opinion, rich people should have the FREEDOM to be selfish assholes.

Because by using that "tax the rich to the hilt because they can afford it" reasoning, that takes away their FREEDOM, and, in my opinion, FREEDOM is more important than ANYTHING.

Good discussion, and thanks again to those of you who are keeping it civil.
 
Top