MeanMrMustard
JoinedPosts by MeanMrMustard
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@SRM: No, in this case the rich man has what he needs to create new businesses or reinvest in current businesses. Or charity. Not both. Why is his choice immoral?
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
In theory, if it's voluntary, every rich person could decide to give exactly no money each and every month.
Yup. That's exactly my position. If you don't want to help save the world, then there is absolutely no obligation enforced upon you to do so.
Just don't expect anyone else to consider you in any way, moral.
And this is what I am challenging.
Since your thread is about morality, why would you consider a rich man, who chooses not to give to charity, immoral? How do you know there aren’t other reasons why he made that choice? Why does it have to be immorality? He could be investing it, perhaps creating new businesses even. In this case he is simply participating in the market, not charity. He can’t afford the charity right now, even though he is rich. If he decided to give, he wouldn’t be able to create. By creating a business that will produce wages, and perhaps products that will make everyone’s life better, he is immoral? Why must he choose to do what *you* think he should do in order to be moral?
-
24
May 1 2018 my Ayahuasca Experience
by new boy init has been over a year and a half since my last ceremony.
which was way to long.
my son came up from scottsdale for the ceremony.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Why do you like turtles so much?
Well, I like rocks.
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@SRM:
No, we all starve. You are going to have the same problem as the socialists - your economy will not be able to calculate resource usage. Nothing good will come of it.
And don’t mischaracterize me. Charity is perfectly moral.
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Then we have no common ground. If you would rather see people starve, than for the rich to become less rich, I have to wonder what your criteria far morality actually are.
No SRM,
Read it again. If we eliminate capital investment, we starve. I am saying that your position will result in starvation. Free market capitalism is moral and results in actual prosperity. Your system would result in death. Why do you feel you hold the moral high ground?
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Interesting. Let's turn this question around. Do you think that if someone has a large amount of money, and decides not to use it to rescue our poorer brethren from starvation, they can consider themselves moral?
Yes, they are perfectly moral.
Now, if you please, will you answer my questions?
As I recall, I referred to a massive charitable exercise on behalf of the rich, to succour the poor. By which, at the time, I meant by the rich, for the poor. But, I also think that a voluntary devestment of the assets of the rich would not do them any spiritual harm, and might even, come judgment day, do them some favours.
And we are back talking about capital investment. If the rich divest themselves of capital, and instead of putting it toward productive measures, gives it away for consumption only, then they are dooming our economy completely. Do you feel the rich would incur spiritual harm by causing millions more to starve?
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@SRM:
Right, and you also said the redistribution would be “on behalf of” the rich. The seemingly contradictory statements need clairification.
Assuming we are past this, what is immoral (since this thread is about morality) about someone being rich? Also, if someone has a large amount of money, do you view that person as immoral if he/she refuses to divide it equally among the world’s population?
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@SRM: Just to be clear - you are backing off of this original position:
Let us take all the world's wealth, and divide it equitably amongst all the world's people. And let us take all the world's annual production, and divide it equitably amongst all the world's people.
“On behalf of” rich people...
-
226
Wealth, Poverty, and Morality
by SecondRateMind ini am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@SRM:
Glad to hear your father is OK.
However, you are still not stating your position very well. If you are speaking of charity, then fine. This is no difference than our current situation, in which charity can be given freely by anyone. Although you could do well to encourage charity by getting the government out of the charity business.
But if your “charity” is taking the money of the rich, then it is theft, and you are back to our original problem.