How much do the rich care about us?

Post Reply New Topic

There is surely no a priori princple that requires anyone to care. I assume that the rich are motivated the same way that the not-rich are motivated; by their perceived self interest.

ruveyn

I'm flattered. Have a cookie.

They don't care and it's getting worse as psychopathy is glorified and they are taught to believe in it and also in the notion that wealth is tied to virtue - thus those without it are mired in evil and those with it are angels...

How much are the rich required to care about the rest of us?

How much are you required to care about the rich?

ruveyn

Historically, wealth was stigmatized as always having been gained in some illegitimate way while poverty was portrayed as a virtue, the "Eye of the needle" passage being but one of the more famous examples.

I would say that on the whole rich people don't give a toss about anything but themselves and the growth of their own personal wealth.

But I reckon some do want to contribute something to humanity for the good of humanity. So I would say that richness does not render a person completely selfish, but allows them to make choices. Most choose to be selfish, but some seem to choose to be unselfish I suppose.

That is true for most people. Their primary concern is themselves. So why rag on the rich for being like just about everybody.

ruveyn

Yummy!

A lot of problems for the poor are caused by the rich. If everyone was poor there would be nobody hogging all the resources and exploiting everyone else's lack of them, sounds pretty awesome to me.

If everyone were poor most of the resources the earth has to offer would be out of reach. Without people who had access to capital, most of the oil would still be underground and most of the coal would be unmined.

How many jobs have poor created?

ruveyn

i do not talk in terms of "we". i talk in terms of "me".




i was not saying that all people with money will help all people without it. i was saying that "some" people with money will help "some" people without it. without me, my friend mark would be in a homeless shelter because i help him pay his rent and electricity.
if i had no money, i would only be able to shrug my shoulders and wish him all the best.
i have not enough money to help everyone, but i have enough to help some. my friend tammy would live a very spartan life without my help. i give her money to buy nice clothes and eat tasty food.




if everyone was poor then they would all be poor period. you are essentially saying that if everyone was poor then everyone would be well off.

if everyone was poor, then no one would have anything.

if no one took command and mass produced, then everyone would have to work all day every day in their small plots of land in order to produce a bowl of rice or whatever that they gobble hungrily after all that toil so they can replenish their energy to perform the same task the next day.

with the corporations of today, people work for 8 hours and can then go and buy an amount of groceries that they would have no hope of ever being able to produce on their own.

you may say that people of the past could have a plot of land of about 1000 acres and grow meat and corn and timber and potatoes and milk and eggs and fruit and be happily self sufficient.

there are 6.7 billion people on the world today and there are not enough resources or land in fertile areas to be able to live that style of life any more.

today, if everyone had a plot of land to do what they liked on in a fertile area, it would be not enough to sustain them no matter what they did.

anyway my program has finished computing a new animation and i want to inspect it so see ya.

"if no one took command and mass produced, then everyone would have to work all day every day in their small plots of land in order to produce a bowl of rice or whatever that they gobble hungrily after all that toil so they can replenish their energy to perform the same task the next day.

with the corporations of today, people work for 8 hours and can then go and buy an amount of groceries that they would have no hope of ever being able to produce on their own. "


Apparently studies of tribal populations in the world today show they spend much less time per day hunting and gathering than we do in work. Technological progress usually just increases the types of work we have to do rather than allowing us to do our work quicker.

I think the main reason people don't want to poor in todays world is because they want consumer goods like cars, jewelry, designer clothes etc. Not because they want more food. I reckon people of the past were better off because they were ignorant of all the things that we desire in todays world. Consumerism has increased our desire for things that we don't even need.

A great deal.

They need fodder for their factories, offices, corporations and of course to be put into 'harms way' to protect their wealth.

They care a great deal about the modern-day serfs of capitalism.

So Buffett is giving 99% of his fortune away for tax benefits, yeah?

If you live in Australia, you know about the superannuation guarantee, where the government forces a percentage of everyone's income into tax-benefitted superannuation schemes. Thereby making a sitting duck target for financial risk takers to boost their numbers against.

The rich? I've never actually had any contact with them but my opinion is that they care about as much for us as I do for the welfare of the next spring lamb.

There is no pressing reason for anyone to care about others in a positive way except, of course, for friends, family and kin folk. We tend to look after ourselves and our own.

ruveyn