“I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.” ― Thomas Sowell,
Incorrect assumptions abound in that quote. I'll attempt to address a few, since it is apparently too difficult for some people to grasp some rather simple concepts, and I tend to enjoy teaching people such things. That inability to understand simple concepts is rather crucial to the main purpose of this response, so I'll also attempt to address it first. When I say "attempt", I mean that in the sense that, if you are in need of water, you can be led to it, but you cannot be forced to drink it. Free Will dictates that a person is free to choose between various options. In this case, I'm using it to highlight a significant issue, a concern I have with the more moderate republicans, as well as other people in general, who are somewhat misguided. That issue is willful ignorance. This "willful ignorance" is a plague among otherwise good people. They listen in earnest to one point of an argument, but intentionally ignore the merits of any counter-point presented to them. The reason this plague of ignorance has gotten this serious is obvious to those who do consider both opposing points. It's being cultivated by dishonest people who will benefit by that deception. Money is the primary benefit, but power and influence, and the prestige and popularity they bring, are all intertwined in that. Using the ill-gotten and naive support of otherwise good people, those dishonest people are able to make their own rules, and the benefits just get better and better...for them. Those naive supporters, who are not easily susceptible to corruption, fail to realize a significant point, that the "leaders" they are choosing to follow are not interested in anyone's general well-being, except their own. As for greed, this shouldn't be too difficult to grasp, even for the naive: Power corrupts. It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that the consolidation of power among the few leads to the consolidation of wealth among the few. That type of accumulation is an example of what "greed" is. I suggest that the term "earned", as applied in the opening post, be given a careful and thorough consideration. The way it is used here implies a number of things, one of which, the one I am most concerned with, is that those who receive financial assistance, via the government, have no right to such assistance. This too is a form of greed. In this sense, it's manifested as a reluctance, or refusal, to provide assistance to those most in need of that assistance, in order to hoard their own wealth. Worse, this hoarding of wealth is sometimes chosen even when the hoarders know that those in need of assistance are suffering, and dying, as a result of that choice. That type of greed is absolutely unacceptable, and not just by me, but by the general principles that help guide us to be good people. I'll put it another way. God, as some of you appear to believe in, wants you to understand the concepts of good and bad, and why greed is discouraged. It encourages Free Will. It favors the good. It is your best interest to agree with your God, as it has some rather interesting and creative ways of punishing those who don't. Suffering, the intentionally inflicted sufferings of large masses of people by other people in particular, is absolutely unacceptable to it. It really isn't that hard to grasp. Ignore that if you want, the choice is yours. Free Will and all that. Good night.
OK, maybe I'm being a bit too dramatic there...(coughs)...but greed is a such a simple concept I get frustrated when people can't grasp it. I'll try again. Greed isn't where you accumulate wealth in order to sustain your life, as everyone needs a healthy dose of it in order to live a happy, healthy life. Greed is where you accumulate wealth and refuse to even consider sharing the excess. A good person can have excessive wealth, even though that is a form of greed: gluttony. The issue of greed lies more along the lines of refusing to consider the option to relieve the sufferings of the less fortunate. In short, you know your excess will help, but you refuse to do so. btw, I thought you right-wingers here had a thing against people who considered themselves a "Marxist". Sowelll said he did just that, back in his 20's.
Your approach the argument under the assumption that greed is the natural state of man and must be countered with forced philanthropy. I beg to differ; Carnegie, Rockefeller, Mellon, Ford, not to mention Gates, Turner, and Buffet are people of extreme wealth who are also people of extreme generosity who have founded and contributed to philanthropic organizations through their own money and free will. As Mellon put it, I would not be allowed to give so much were I not allowed to earn so much. I can understand why Sowell was a Marxist in his 20's. The plan sounds great on paper, but fails under practical application and digresses into a bureaucratic nightmare ineffective at addressing the problems. Forced philanthropy is counter to free will. Davy Crockett addressing congress asked if government had the right to remove the burden of charity. Once the burden is removed, so is empathy. Should it tell the next homeless person I see that as a tax payer I gave at the office or should I stop, listen to their story, and decide for my self if my help is warranted. Am I feeding the hungry or making a donation to substance abuse. Conservatives generally believe that charity is a moral imperative and donate through churches and organizations that are actively addressing the problem. Many of which utilize volunteer help and put 90% of what they take in directly into the hands of those in need. Does government welfare do the same? Smaller private organizations are better suited in treating individuals on an individual basis. Bureaucracies categorize and offer boilerplate services to classes of people. James Cagney, who grew up in "hells kitchen" stated simply "With one hand the give you a check, with the other hand they take away your dreams." Is this the people we want to be?
Forced philanthropy wouldn't be necessary if compassion ruled our hearts instead of greed. Churches are not universal, they are isolated groups of like-minded individuals, and tend to only help those within their group. IMO, government must help those most in need, because only they have the ability to do so on a massive scale, the scale that truly matters. But don't worry about it, I have faith that compassion is going to make a comeback. I insist on it, actually, and I believe the tide has turned in favor of the good. It's kinda a "Done Deal", in that sense. But, I don't expect everyone to agree, Free Will and all that. I can tell you that conservatism is a component of any person, any society, but when it becomes the primary focus, when greed becomes too strong, the defenseless begin to suffer more and more. Eventually it reaches a point where society must make a choice: Do we promote individual wealth-accumulation over taking care of those most in need, or do we promote compassion for the less fortunate and discourage greed. I'm confident now that we, as a society, have chosen the latter. There are still battles to be fought, but all-in-all I feel confident that we now have the time to tackle the problems of our day. I say that because for a long time I struggled with a very basic thought: Should humanity be wiped-out. Ever since Reagan became president, I've struggled with that. Only recently, just this morning in fact, have I become satisfied that we are worthy of a continuing existence, that...should an asteroid capable of causing massive death on an Earth-wide scale be heading our way, the moon may take the brunt of it. That'd be interesting to me, because I have a hypothesis as to how the moon stays in orbit the way it does, and it would be interesting to see if that could be verified this way. Probably not, but the explosion would produce some cool effects in the sky...very cool effects, but then again I like Winter anyway lol Then again, maybe we wouldn't even see the sucker coming, maybe the moon isn't part of the equation, and maybe it'll skim along the atmosphere, heating it a bit. The "fire-works" would be spectacular! Eh, I like the colder scenario myself, but it's not like that sort of thing is my decision to make, I'm just someone who is highly imaginative in nature. Have a good day.
You are nuts!! How could anyone like winter I'm here down south freezing my butt off. Didn't you see Atlanta and I'm 200 miles north of that. Way way down south in the village where I was born, water didn't freeze on it own. You had to have compressors and ice boxes to chill enough water to have crushed ice for those Mojitos. But I digress.......... The belief that we as a species, do not deserve to exist is a lot like Calvinism run a muck. Mankind is so full of sin that it is predestined that most of us will experience the fiery pit of hell, unless of course you're one of the 700 (self)righteous that makes the grade. {Please note that "self" is silent in this case and simply pronounced "righteous"} A cash donation will be required. I digress even further......... The problem I have with government assistance is it's effectiveness. Social programs are not as effective in reducing poverty, where a good economy is the best cure. Here are a couple of links, the first argues the point of ineffective social programs, the second has a lot of raw data and an interesting look at poverty in general with arguments for both sides. http://www.economicsjunkie.com/us-poverty-rate-how-the-great-society-programs-reversed-its-decline/ http://www.sp2.upenn.edu/america2000/wp7all.pdf I absolutely agree with you that people and society are getting better in dealing with social and economic challenges, and that we are becoming the people we like to think we are. Perceptions create reality and define how we live our lives and the type of people we become.
Greed certainly is an interesting topic as referenced by my sig line. Anybody that thinks greed doesn't play a huge role in the capitalism model is a naive fool. Of course it does. That does not however mean that everyone that has made a boatload of money under this system is a greedy bastard. There are plenty of examples of charitable very financially successful people in this country. The problem is that the greedy among them try to blend in with their more charitable brethren and worse yet try to pretend that there are no greedy bastards out there because other's give of themselves even while they don't. So let's just admit that greed is definitely an attribute that exists in the capitalist system. Many studies have pointed out that there is a significant number of sociopaths in the ranks of the super wealthy. You almost have to be a sociopath to single-mindedly amass a huge fortune beyond any reasonable point that most of us would have long ago ceased to add to. It takes a focus that most people do not have nor would most people want to have. So, is it really so hard to believe that greed is some aspect of wealth to some degree? Not so much. I do not have any real issue with greedy people until their greed impacts the lives of people struggling to put food in the table. I know that the Rightwing believes that their is absolutely know correlation between the greed of the super wealthy and the suffering of the bottom half of the population. I mean, if greed is nothing else it certainly is the unfettered amassing of resources in the hands of a few to the detriment of the many. Everyone can agree that any resource is finite whether that resource is food, water, heat, shelter, or any number of other necessities. When you have a situation where 85 people in the world have the same wealth as the bottom half the population of the world, you have to know that somebody is going to bed hungry. Interestingly, we use to have a 90% of income over a million dollars in this country and we still have wealthy people. They simply reinvested in the business they were in rather than pay all the money in taxes. They still got very rich but obviously they had to work harder at it and the incentive to lift the middle class was built into the system. Greed changed all that over time and look at the middle class today. Huge unemployment, stagnant wages, widening poor vs rich gap, poverty increases year after year, and upward mobility at an all time low, all which were predicted when the income tax structure was changed. Now add in NAFTA and ask yourself what incentives does any corporation have to see that the middle class grows in this country. Now congress is trying to fast track the TPP which has been called NAFTA on steroids. If this passes congress and is signed into law, kiss the middle class good bye. Greed wins again. We all might as well move to Asia.
A good economy and education could alleviate a huge percentage of the problems this country has. People are not lazy as the Rightwing sees them. They want to work and be productive citizens. They simply need the opportunities that either come from the private sector or the public sector. I just have to think that there really is no one left that cares about the plight of people that want to work but simply don't have any means of finding good jobs anymore. Corporations are doing great right now but you don't see that success trickling down to the middle class. Why is that? The model is broken and getting worse. Even those that worked all their lives and saved for the future are now getting screwed out the pensions they earned. And who fights for them? Nobody.
Thank you? I mean, that kind of assertion, coming from someone who is essentially neutralized politically, specifically because of their rather extremist's point-of-view (read: Coo-Coo!), amuses me. Please continue.
A great many people are fighting that fight, the fight for equality along social/economic-lines, and they are going to succeed in changing the rules governing wealth-distribution/rationing/charity, etc. The momentum has changed. Since the early 80's, the gap widened, but it can't be sustained. Eventually, it collapses, because people can only be drained of $$$ to a certain point, once that point is reached, and it's been reached btw, public opinion changes to reverse that trend. How far that will go is questionable, but people are pissed...really really pissed...and it's not inconceivable that they will force certain changes in the way money is distributed among themselves. It's happening already. It'll take time for more concrete results, but the balance has shifted in favor of being charitable, rather than greedy. I hope it stays that way. I hope people take this opportunity to institute significant change in our society, while it's here. Greed is insidious though, so it's not going to be a cake-walk.
I was actually talking about the weather, as in I hate winter. I realize I was off topic and meant no offense. Extreme point of view, you bet, but it's no way to run a country. Amusing, as an entertainment professional, thank you, that's what I'm here for. As to how I feel about you guys, check your like button, I don't mind clouding the issues with more than one point of view. Hope this makes sense, I've been off my medications for a while now and...........
lol...Don't mind me, I've been drinkin'. I tell you what though, I'll stop Heikiing for a while so you can warm-up. The neighbors would probably appreciate it anyway. Some people just don't appreciate naked people dancing in their yard. ...Well that and it's pretty cold out anyway. Time for some sun...before my penis becomes an "inny".
You misread it completely! Earned = you werk'd for it, it belongs to you! It is your lawful property, not anyone else's. Greed = government sticking their hand in your pocket and calling it TAXES, instead of THEFT, but they write the laws, don't they! You misread it, bigtime! Riddle We This: Meet Joe Black meets Joe Dirt and what happens? Answer: Meet Toad Black Dirt, a Bi-versal Entity! Ribbit
Whose place is it to judge whether someone can be greedy or not....and who determines what "greed" really is?
Who's place is it to judge? In a sense, everyone. Some ignore their own greed, some don't. It's not easy, as it's a primal function of survival. We consume resources in order to survive, we collect and store those resources to survive future shortages in resources, emergencies and whatnot. The issue I have with it is that too much greed harms the greater good that we can do with the unnecessary excess. A little greed is good, and necessary. Too much greed is bad, and harmful. Hope that helps.
"Greed" is really a subjective term. There could, for instance, be a somewhat-employed, toothless person living in, say, Houghton Michigan who some would see as extremely greedy because he (or she) has a computer, the internet, food and a roof over their head, but isn't willing to share it with those who don't have a computer, the internet, food or a roof.
Thomas Aquinas wrote "Greed is a sin against God, just as all mortal sins, in as much as man condemns things eternal for the sake of temporal things.".