• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Exile20

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,055


This is a good watch and puts some things into perspective when it comes to this topic.

The main issue I have is that the rich write the rules to play by. So many tax loop holes and laws that benefit them to keep their wealth, then there is this ideal that they are hoarding money. They are rich already but still have so many benefits in their favor. The guy does have a point, it is the system that is the problem not the individual, but these people also play the victim which is just laughable imho.

What does everyone think about the rich and how they fit into society instead of on top of a hill looking down on everyone else?
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,950
There's no place for the rich when so much of the rest of society is struggling. Any billionaire fighting to horde more wealth by gaming the system is a monster.
 

Dice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,427
Canada
I kinda feel more 70-30 on "hate the game not the player".

You DO get people who use their wealth for good...shame how few and far between they are.
 

Transistor

Hollowly Brittle
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
37,196
Washington, D.C.
There's no place for the rich when so much of the rest of society is struggling. Any billionaire fighting to horde more wealth by gaming the system is a monster.

Bingo. Simple as that.

I kinda feel more 70-30 on "hate the game not the player".

You DO get people who use their wealth for good...shame how few and far between they are.
And doing good with that wealth is often met with tax breaks due to charitable contributions. The hoarders can go fuck themselves
 

Sub Boss

Banned
Nov 14, 2017
13,441
Mostly the system though there are some rich assholes worth critisizing because they step on human rights
 

wholahay

Member
Dec 18, 2017
708
I love demonizing the rich! It's a hobby really. I can't think of anything less moral than hoarding wealth when we live in a world of constant suffering, most of which can be alleviated by throwing money at it. Even "good" wealthy people are seem to me irreparably poisoned by greed when you look at what they do vs. what they could do.

In terms of "punishing success"--no one is billions-of-dollars successful in a vacuum where other people's labor didn't get them that money. You know where I'm going with this...
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
More millionaire coddling.

Fuck the rich and the Bentley they ride on.

How about assuring that everyone is taken care of first?
 
Nov 1, 2017
1,020
I think what contributes to the resentment of the wealthy is that you have a period in the US now where an entire generation by and large is saddled is massive student loans (that many were urged to take on at 17-18 as a path towards success) and an unstable job market and those that wield the most influence because of their wealth are just like "dealwithit.gif" rather than working to provide solutions.
 
Oct 27, 2017
10,660
Success is not how people became this rich. They did so by doing unethical things, immoral things, by cheating, and lying, extortion, and abuse. There is no ethical way to obtain such wealth.
 

Moist_Owlet

Banned
Dec 26, 2017
4,148
Most of them are parasites that rely on us to achieve their wealth and give nothing back. Sociopaths.
 

Squarehard

Member
Oct 27, 2017
25,957
It's more the fact that they don't want to acknowledge it publicly, and pretend there isn't a problem, or the problem isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be that's the issue.

They make their own case for being talked about poorly because the vast, vast majority of them are unwilling to take any criticism that will make them look bad because their feelings got hurt.

Nobody says the system isn't broken, because no fucking shit, that's obvious. The problem is that the rich do little to give a fuck the system is broken because they continue to take advantage of it because people are unwilling to call them out on it, as they're the ones paying the politicians to not say anything about, and in many cases, are willing to become those politicians to start pulling the strings to make sure the system stays broken.

While I'm not sure exactly what you had hoped for in a discussion of this topic with the way you framed the op, but I feel you are way, way off in what you're trying to imply in regards to the public image of the rich as if they're not doing anything themselves to make the problem worse.

One of them recently was so pouty people were mean to them, he decided to run for President, and then gave no actual answers at a town hall meeting to explain any of his positions.
I kinda feel more 70-30 on "hate the game not the player".

You DO get people who use their wealth for good...shame how few and far between they are.
I'd say it's about 1% of the 99% that gives a fuck.
 

SegFault

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,939
The rich don't fit into society. They are an entirely different class that no one in the middle or lower classes, no matter how much they say otherwise, will ever be able to relate to them in any way whatsoever.

The gross number of billionaires and multimillionaires should be seen as a failure of society
 

XMonkey

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,827
The answer is no, we're not incorrect in demonizing the rich. That's exactly what they deserve.
 

WhoTurgled

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,052
its literally impossible to have done any work as an individual worth a billion dollars
when someone has a billion dollars its because they stole it
 

Keasar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,724
Umeå, Sweden
I hate the system.

But I also hate the individuals who willingly use and keep using said system to gain a insurmountable wealth they will never use in their lifetimes when so much of the world is suffering because of that. And when they sit sorrounded by their multiple houses, yachts, private planes and whine about being taxed extra (and they will still be able to keep all said possessions with said taxes), then they can go fuck themselves even more.

And when the richest start devising plans to flee the shitfields they have created and leave the rest of us to die, then I think a guillotine is not good enough punishments to enact on them....
 

Deleted member 8861

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,564
I see rich and ultra-rich/billionaire/multimillionaire on different levels. My family is pretty close to the former.

Although it's blurry, there's a line between "money generally isn't an issue" and "political lobbyist in the interest of money". I'm not exactly sure where it lies. Perhaps it's playing the stock market.

Anyway, to an extent, I believe people can deserve to be rich. Not everyone is, and quite obviously not everyone who deserves to be rich actually is, but some people do succeed in this system. I don't think those people are "demonized", either. I personally don't feel demonized, because the reason people are complaining is fucking obvious. Some people, even if they're successful to a degree in this system, aren't really capable of any change. Being able to prosper yourself sometimes means that's your scope of influence, yourself and your immediate family.

I believe the rich that deserve to be vilified are those who are able to wield political and large-scale influence- billionaires. At that point, charity is a responsibility.
 

Ayato_Kanzaki

Member
Nov 22, 2017
1,481
Who has the power to change the system? The billionnaires. To decide between blaming the system or the rich is as futile as trying to decide if chickens or eggs came first. What matter is who can change the situation for the better, and instead make it worse.

The use of their lobbying power the have to unbalance society ever further in their advantage is treason against the community they live in.
 

low-G

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,144
To act morally, the ultra rich absolutely should donate the majority of their wealth. Not the same onus for the mildly rich, low digit millionaires etc.

The system is the source of the problem, but those that propagate it aren't much better. If people weren't suffering and dying, there would be no such obligation on the rich.

The scale should be exclusively -getting by OK, all needs (physical through economical) are met- through -a level maintainable by civilization that doesn't lead to inequality currently or in the future-
 

TheJackdog

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,644
I see rich and ultra-rich/billionaire/multimillionaire on different levels. My family is pretty close to the former.

Although it's blurry, there's a line between "money generally isn't an issue" and "political lobbyist in the interest of money". I'm not exactly sure where it lies. Perhaps it's playing the stock market.

Anyway, to an extent, I believe people can deserve to be rich. Not everyone is, and quite obviously not everyone who deserves to be rich actually is, but some people do succeed in this system. I don't think those people are "demonized", either. I personally don't feel demonized, because the reason people are complaining is fucking obvious. Some people, even if they're successful to a degree in this system, aren't really capable of any change. Being able to prosper yourself sometimes means that's your scope of influence, yourself and your immediate family.

I believe the rich that deserve to be vilified are those who are able to wield political and large-scale influence- billionaires. At that point, charity is a responsibility.

the entire idea of capitalism goes against this doesnt it?

no one should "deserve" to be rich. it should be earned through individual (not familial) achievement only.

not saying i think that, but thats capitalism no?
 

Lundren

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,745
So are we talking about people making $100k and more? Because that other thread had a lot of people defining that as rich.

I would assume that with the OP being framed around a video titled "Is Taxing the Ultra-Wealthy 'Punishing Success'" that we have a good idea who we are talking about.
 

TheJackdog

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,644
also how in the world can you even debate system vs individuals as the problem?

the individuals benefiting created the system
 

jph139

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,387
So are we talking about people making $100k and more? Because that other thread had a lot of people defining that as rich.

In general, if your prioritize your comfort over the basic survival of other human beings - I'd call you a bad person.

(Note: most people are bad, including me.)
 

Plum

Member
May 31, 2018
17,309
"Punishing success," is making graduates work overly-long hours for fuck-all pay despite having worked their asses off getting a degree.
"Punishing success," is laying off hundreds of hard-working veteran employees in the same year the company is successful and the CEO gets a $15m 'bonus'
"Punishing success," is depriving entire generations of the fruits of the massive economic growth they themselves helped to achieve and then completely fucking up the world so that future generations are even more deprived

"Punishing success," is not reducing the number of lifetimes a multi-billionaire would need to spend all their money down from 100 lifetimes to 30.
 

Marvelous

Member
Nov 3, 2017
350
The whole "hate the game, not the player" angle attempted is such bullshit; the idea that the importance of morality actually lies in legality is just a tactic to allow those in power to remain untouched by public perception. Of course, only of those who are trying to travel along the same lines as these billionaires - to abuse and take without giving in return.

It feels like so much of this discussion is set at an arms length because we're talking about money instead of morality. Yes, they're billionaires, but they've done a lot of moral misdeed to achieve that status. Let's not get stuck on that fact like being a billionaire is some sort of birth trait.

For instance, would you trust in anyone who defends Brock Turner for being able to rape a girl and get away with it? "Hate the game, not the player," right? Brock Turner didn't do anything wrong: it's really the system that we should be angry about. Why's it so hard for people to understand that both are an issue: the socio-economical structure that allows for systemic abuse, as well as the individual who capitalizes on the system at the expense of everyone else. Each side feeds into the other; both are monsters that will continue to chip away at sustainability and equality.
 

RailWays

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
15,684
So are we talking about people making $100k and more? Because that other thread had a lot of people defining that as rich.
No, because that is mainly defined by relative earning by location. The people that hold all the wealth in society are not the portion making a bit over 100k, but the people who hoard millions
 

Deleted member 8861

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,564
the entire idea of capitalism goes against this doesnt it?

no one should "deserve" to be rich. it should be earned through individual (not familial) achievement only.

not saying i think that, but thats capitalism no?
What I meant was that working within the limitations of the system, some people, although few in number, do work hard and get to places of prosperity. Consequently, ethically speaking, those people have accomplished enough to be where they are (in my opinion). Successful, but not so much money for themselves that they're a significant perpetuator of the evil sides of capitalism. By "deserving", I mean "earned". At least so long as we live in a capitalist system.

My views on "only individual achievement" are different, mainly because you'd have to dismantle the entire notion of family for such a thing to happen and I don't think anyone would want a society like that.

edit: To reiterate none of this applies to billionaires
 

Deleted member 7051

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,254
Money is an intentionally finite source and the rich hoard it for themselves when it could be used to save and enrich lives. I don't know how anyone could believe that we need them. It's even worse when they avoid paying taxes because they don't believe the governments of the world would know how to spend their money better than they do.
 

Darknight

"I'd buy that for a dollar!"
Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,862

Here ya go if you're interested:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...someone-making-100k-yr-rich-what-the-f.96273/

I would assume that with the OP being framed around a video titled "Is Taxing the Ultra-Wealthy 'Punishing Success'" that we have a good idea who we are talking about.

My problem is how we keep changing the definition of rich to the point where it loses meaning on top of while doing so lowering the bar of what we should consider the standard of living to be.

Along these lines, I feel like we're all collectively (in the US anyway) bad to being open about discussing what is wealthy and how that impacts how we view money and careers.

I agree.

This is why progressive taxation and redistribution through services is the key. The more you make, the more you should pay. The rich still get to be rich, but those not as well off don't have to eat their boots to survive.


We do have a tax system where the more you make, the more you should pay but I'll definitely agree that it isn't aggressive enough at the higher end.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,950
Here ya go if you're interested:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...someone-making-100k-yr-rich-what-the-f.96273/



My problem is how we keep changing the definition of rich to the point where it loses meaning on top of while doing so lowering the bar of what we should consider the standard of living to be.



I agree.




We do have a tax system where the more you make, the more you should pay but I'll definitely agree that it isn't aggressive enough at the higher end.

Yeah, what we have isn't enough. It's mostly punitive to the middle class without allowing enough benefit to the bottom.
 

Darknight

"I'd buy that for a dollar!"
Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,862
No, because that is mainly defined by relative earning by location. The people that hold all the wealth in society are not the portion making a bit over 100k, but the people who hoard millions

I agree, but there were many people in that other thread who would ignore the cost of living factor and flat out consider anyone making $100k or more was rich.
 

Threadkular

Member
Dec 29, 2017
2,420
Not to get too nihilistic, but whenever this forum does discussions of salary it's all people not understanding how people can possibly survive on sub $100k salaries, when that's the top 5% of income in the U.S. and almost certainly top 1% in the world. That's humans.

Try to be grateful for what you have and be a good person.
 

ScatheZombie

Member
Oct 26, 2017
398
The only problem with the phrase "hate the game, not the player" is that the extremely wealthy control the game too.

If the system is the problem, the top billionaires/millionaires in the country easily have the collective resources to change it immediately. Because our (American) government system has shown repeatedly that you can make anything happen if you throw enough money at Congress. And the horrible thing is that our congress members aren't even that expensive.