It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
keeveek: What do you do to redistribute wealth? I will never have 45k dollars to spend on anything, but I'm not sad because of that. I don't know if I will be able to start a family with current jobs market in Poland. But I'm not mad on people who have more money than me. I'm thinking about how I'm gonna live next year, not how to take away money from rich that I would have more.
You know keeveek, I'm not trying to be an asshole here or anything so please don't take this the wrong way, but I just want to point out something because you've made several similar remakes in this thread. You don't seem to understand the difference between discussion and complaining. There is a difference between having a discussion about world issues and simply bitching about life being unfair. And, I've always had an issue with people like you who seem to think that there's never any point in talking about anything. How would we ever have any change in the world if everyone always just accepted things at face value? Sometimes issues require our attention, and it's good to have discussions about things. You seem like a "Because that's just the way it is" kind of person, and maybe it's because I have a scientific mind, but I've never been able to accept that as a good answer for anything.

Like I said, I'm not trying to be an asshole towards you, but I think your remarks are unwarranted. You can always avoid this particular discussion if you aren't interested in it or feel it unnecessary =)
Post edited January 31, 2013 by Qwertyman
avatar
Qwertyman: Like I said, I'm not trying to be an asshole towards you, but I think your remarks are unwarranted. You can always avoid this particular discussion if you aren't interested in it or feel it unnecessary =)
No offence taken :-) I'm just simply think that discussing the world's unfairness doesn't lead to any conclusion. Even if you would redistribute wealth better, the situation would return to being exactly the same after some time.

I just accepted that this world works how it works.
avatar
Qwertyman: But to compare that to a person who drops 45k a night on a bar tab, and then say that the person who bought one beer is just as wasteful as the person who spent 45k on alcohol because somewhere in the world a person could live from the price of that one beer - that is a massive leap of logic that simply doesn't follow. If that person who bought one beer is wasteful, than how wasteful is ti to buy 45k worth of beer? They are not equal.
It's got nothing to do with the language barrier, I know what you're saying, I just disagree. I mean, of course it is kinda crazy that some people will pay a hundred times the worth of something just because they can but the point is, everyone in the world (with really few exceptions) who has more money than he needs to get by spends that money on luxuries. The point is that everybody is wasteful and it's funny to accuse rich people of being more wasteful - of course they are because they have more money. I mean, they also have bigger houses, more expensive cars, more expensive clothing etc. while they don't need that stuff - it seems more absurd in case of beverages but it's not, it's all about exclusivity, status symbols etc.. The outrage is ridiculous in either case. Just be happy that there's legit businesses where the rich can spend their money so they can at least somewhat fuel the economy. It definitely beats hoarding money on Swiss bank accounts.
Post edited January 31, 2013 by F4LL0UT
avatar
Qwertyman: Like I said, I'm not trying to be an asshole towards you, but I think your remarks are unwarranted. You can always avoid this particular discussion if you aren't interested in it or feel it unnecessary =)
avatar
keeveek: No offence taken :-) I'm just simply think that discussing the world's unfairness doesn't lead to any conclusion. Even if you would redistribute wealth better, the situation would return to being exactly the same after some time.

I just accepted that this world works how it works.
I'm not convinced that the redistribution of wealth would solve all of our problems either, but for me, it's still important to discuss the possibilities. There's an old quote by Plato that goes something like this: "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." I believe there's truth in that.

I know that we can't change everything in the world, but like I said, I have a scientific mind so I have a tendency to try to figure out the why's and the how's and I generally don't just accept things outright. Also, possibly because I'm a military veteran, I am passionate about the affairs of our nation, and we currently have a problem in the US where the divide between the rich and poor is growing and the middle class is being eliminated, and there's growing concern over class warfare becoming a big issue. So again, for me it's important to have these discussions because it's currently an important topic in the US as we are seeing our standards of living decline and wondering why the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. Economically that is not a good situation for your country to be in.
I would love to change the world, but I don't know what it wears.
avatar
F4LL0UT: It's got nothing to do with the language barrier, I know what you're saying, I just disagree. I mean, of course it is kinda crazy that some people will pay a hundred times the worth of something just because they can but the point is, everyone in the world (with really few exceptions) who has more money than he needs to get by spends that money on luxuries. The point is that everybody is wasteful and it's funny to accuse rich people of being more wasteful - of course they are because they have more money. I mean, they also have bigger houses, more expensive cars, more expensive clothing etc. while they don't need that stuff - it seems more absurd in case of beverages but it's not, it's all about exclusivity, status symbols etc.. The outrage is ridiculous in either case. Just be happy that there's legit businesses where the rich can spend their money so they can at least somewhat fuel the economy. It definitely beats hoarding money on Swiss bank accounts.
Well I can certainly appreciate that you disagree, I thought you were misunderstanding what I was saying. But, the last part of your post I do have to completely disagree with. In America, they call that trickle down economics, and in recent years it's been shown to be completely false. The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poor. Our country is in a recession. Normal people with families are losing jobs and are seeing pay cuts. Meanwhile, the rich people are somehow magically getting richer while everyone else in the country is struggling and losing financial ground. Rich people aren't just getting richer - they are richer then they ever have been, even though we're in a recession! So you see, there is a real problem here, and the rich ultimately are not putting their money back into the economy. They are actually sitting on hordes and hordes of record profits, possibly because of uncertainty about the stock market. There is data to back all of this up - right now, the rich are not doing anything at all to benefit our economy. I'm not saying they are obligated to, but I'm just pointing out that the concept of 'trickle down economics' is completely false.


And besides, in terms of economic benefit for a country, I would argue that having every member of a society making a decent salary stimulates the economy far more than having a few rich people with a ton of money. I'm not advocated socialism here!!! Like I said, I don't believe we should forcefully redistribute wealth. Just having a discussion, that's all.
Post edited January 31, 2013 by Qwertyman
avatar
Telika: . And this rather obscene differential is justified by an ideology that equals wealth to "merit", implying that the struggling people's moral quality is proportionally as lower than the super-rich people's moral quality as their respective wealth are (or that, in a "free market", that would be the case). Redistribution, or mechanisms of diminishing returns, are "immoral", because the "moral" system is the one that allows for exponential differences, seen as legitimate rewards for people's moral virtues (these virtues being, themselves, circularly enough, restricted to the traits that make someone economically productive).
I have no idea what you just said, but I am going to agree anyway.
avatar
Telika:
avatar
CaptainGyro:
Telika gets on my nerves in this regard! :P I am from the U.S., a born English speaker who prides himself on his knowledge and use of the language. I had my high school teachers in awe of my ability and later the same with my professors is college. So along comes this guy from Switzerland and he speaks and writes the language better than I could possible ever hope or dream of doing.

Right now, if there is any justice in this world, there is a bushman crawling around the Kalahari Desert who speaks English way better than him! :P
Post edited January 31, 2013 by tinyE
avatar
iippo: >> 10 000e "so much for so and so work" vs 10 millions for some roadwork "no complaints, because simply dont understand the scope of money nor work".
avatar
keeveek: Oh, this is fairly simple :D Because countries nowadays never give back money they borrowed :D UK can spend 80 billion pounds a year more than they have, because they know they will not give that back ;P At least not entirely :P And it's always easy to spend the money that isn't even yours :D
Well yes there is that - but i mean simple number blindness.

Like take that number you just said "80 billion pounds".

When speaking about sums like this, people dont have the slightest clue what they are talking about. Basicly, they may start talking like they are veryyy serious (and maybe they are) - but then they start haggling with the numbers like "just few billion more or less".

You know, 78 billions or 80 billions - whats the difference. Its just "two" - and that doesnt sound so bad rrright? .D

Or even better - whats the difference of 1,5 billion and 1,4 billion - its just measily 0,1 billion now THAT cant be much money at all. Everything after 0,1 is just like play money ;)
avatar
F4LL0UT: Dude, see, that's the problem. To people in even worse situations even the behaviour of the average middle-class or even lower-class guy may seem disrespectful. I mean, seriously: aren't you a little hypocritical when you judge rich people for the way they spend their money? I know that I spend a lot of my money on unnecessary luxuries. And I'm just glad that normally it's anybody's personal issue what he spends his money on. To be honest the journalists reporting on every piece of shit that celebrities do piss me off more than the behaviour of those rich people does as long as it doesn't directly harm other people.
Stop equating vastly different levels of luxury.
avatar
CaptainGyro:
avatar
tinyE: .... who prides himself on my knowledge....
What? Someone else dares pride himself with your knowledge ?!?!?! How dare he ?!?!?!
This is getting old. I don't think anyone has a problem with how anyone spends their money. The problem people have is that a lot of these people who spend their money recklessly don't care. A lot (not all! I don't want people ripping me for generalizing) who spend like this (see 1st post) have no concept of what they are doing, and THAT is not only annoying, it's borderline offensive. I live well, I buy shit I don't need, I'm hanging out in this forum while other people are killing themselves in coal mines. SHIT, right now I'm debating at this very minute if I should fork over $5 for a silly virtual pinball game when there are people out there who havn't had an extra $5 to play with their whole lives. However, as someone who has seen his share of hard times I get down on my knees everyday and thank my lucky stars that I am where I am now. In turn, my respect, appreciation, and admiration for those not as lucky as me remains limitless and unconditional. Do you think your average debutant gives a shit about the homeless!? These are people that think money grows on trees for everyone and just don't give a shit. Oh sure, from time to time they snap a polaroid in front of a childrens hospital and call it charity, but do you honestly think for a second they would ever take a homeless person in and help them get back on their feet? Do you think they would spend time working in a soup kitchen if there were no cameras rolling?

I'm ranting again. I'll stop for a while.
avatar
StingingVelvet: $45,000 for one night at the bar for this rich young heiress.

FUCK YOU, YOU ARE EVIL.
Did that really happen?

Because if so, damn.
Post edited January 31, 2013 by deathknight1728
avatar
tinyE: .... who prides himself on my knowledge....
avatar
Licurg: What? Someone else dares pride himself with your knowledge ?!?!?! How dare he ?!?!?!
SHAME!
avatar
StingingVelvet: Stop equating vastly different levels of luxury.
Stop pretending that different levels are different things. :P