This makes no sense. The fact that the rich have convinced white conservatives to vote against their interests by stoking racial animus doesn't mean that demonizing the rich serves no purpose. Maybe we should focus on the brainwashers, as well as the brainwashees.
-
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.
Are we demonizing the rich or are just critical of them and the system they created?
- Thread starter Exile20
- Start date
This makes no sense. The fact that the rich have convinced white conservatives to vote against their interests by stoking racial animus doesn't mean that demonizing the rich serves no purpose. Maybe we should focus on the brainwashers, as well as the brainwashees.
Sure, focus on both. But do we honestly think we can demonize/shame/guilt the likes of Howard Schultz, Jeff Bezos, the Koch Brothers etc. into caring about their society over making an extra dollar? I'd wager not but if your calculus is different then by all means focus on them. I'll support anyone working toward a more egalitarian America.
I don't think people like getting screwed over though which is why I see an easier path in getting your common guy Joe Blow to evolve.
Yep, no such thing as a "self-made man" (God I hate that term). EVERY rich had help getting to where they were at some part.
We can't legislate away stupidity and brainwashed minds, but we can put taxes on billionaires, we can go after corporate propaganda, we can go after conservative think tanks, etc, because they all operate within the bounds of the law. When it comes to which arena has the more fruitful possibilities, tackling the deceitful rich or tackling the ignorant poor, the former can be reined in immediately while the latter can only be fixed in the long term.
In my opinion we won't be able to "turn" the Boomer generation of conservatives, and X and Millennials are probably too far gone. However, with comprehensive education and social reform it's possible to reduce the amount of sociopathic Republican voters in the future. But this will take decades, and guess who's standing in the way of education reform? Ding! That's right, the private/charter school industry, which everyone's favorite "ethical" billionaire, Bill Gates, supports.
nobody should be a billionaire but I also don't fault billionaires for playing the game in a way that allows for them to get richer. When you have all these loopholes that legally allow for companies to not pay taxes and the likes, I blame the system more than I do the person taking advantage of the system.
The post directly before yours shows exactly why this stance is naïve bullshit.
The billionaires sustain the system and keep it from changing even as they benefit from it so, yeah, I do blame them.
If the dealer was rigging the cards in cahoots with one of the players at the table to cheat everyone else at the table I'd probably blame both of them.
"Don't hate the player, hate the game" is a pithy aphorism that supports the status quo of inequality and injustice.
Guess I shouldn't blame medieval kings for waging war and oppressing their serfs because they were just taking advantage of the system they lived in. "That makes them smart", right?
If the dealer was rigging the cards in cahoots with one of the players at the table to cheat everyone else at the table I'd probably blame both of them.
"Don't hate the player, hate the game" is a pithy aphorism that supports the status quo of inequality and injustice.
Guess I shouldn't blame medieval kings for waging war and oppressing their serfs because they were just taking advantage of the system they lived in. "That makes them smart", right?
If you suddenly won the lottery. Or got that kick ass job. Or got that big inheritance. Are you telling me that you wouldn't take advantage of the opportunities provided?
It's an unfair system, but don't be a hypocrite and say you would turn down the opportunities available. Even with the smallest things, people just naturally take whatever advantages they can get. The rich Joe who got lucky in life is just playing the game.
Blame the game, not the player. It's an extremely small percentage of the rich that actually can effect policy. The rest are just playing the game. Anybody with a "hate the rich" attitude would probably turn a 180 if they suddenly had those rich opportunities.
It's an unfair system, but don't be a hypocrite and say you would turn down the opportunities available. Even with the smallest things, people just naturally take whatever advantages they can get. The rich Joe who got lucky in life is just playing the game.
Blame the game, not the player. It's an extremely small percentage of the rich that actually can effect policy. The rest are just playing the game. Anybody with a "hate the rich" attitude would probably turn a 180 if they suddenly had those rich opportunities.
Hey, thanks for your input. I'll just put it over here, in the toilet.
There's a world of difference between encountering miraculously lucky circumstances and coming into a finite amount of money and being someone who goes out of their way to amass money beyond any reasonable threshold.
Inheritances and lotteries are taxed quite a bit. Guess which one billionaires are looking to remove taxes on?
Yes, they're playing by "the rules" of the game, but they're also the ones decreeing the rules. Maybe it's time to change those rules, or stop playing.
Like, imagine a sport where the team currently in the lead gets to decide the rules. Why would anybody who's not already winning play that game?
Last edited:
I enjoyed his book. It was a lot of build up without any real solution discussion until the later chapters but it was a good read (or listen if you do it through an audiobook).
The tides are changing. Unless I have overlooked any recent news, it is telling that Amazon is forgoing NYC despite having majority support in the area.
The tides are changing. Unless I have overlooked any recent news, it is telling that Amazon is forgoing NYC despite having majority support in the area.
This is one of the stupidest or most ignorant things I've read all day, all due respect. How long have you been part of the work force?
Nobody has to be a billionaire. That's the distinction between drawing identity from wealth vs. ethnicity, sexuality, gender, etc.
Howard Schultz can go fuck himself. He has enough wealth he never has to worry about any unmet need for a hundred lifetimes. We should confiscate his assets if he isn't happy enough having everything he could ever possibly want.
https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lags-peer-countries-mobility/
So, where you end up in life in the US is about 50% how much your parents make. This is from 2011. The last number I saw was 0.53 though I don't have that data on hand so 0.47 will have to suffice.
I don't know about you but a coin flips chance to do better than your parents feels a lot like luck.
https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lags-peer-countries-mobility/
So, where you end up in life in the US is about 50% how much your parents make. This is from 2011. The last number I saw was 0.53 though I don't have that data on hand so 0.47 will have to suffice.
I don't know about you but a coin flips chance to do better than your parents feels a lot like luck.
I can't dispute this data but the poster I was replying too said "without exception"
Are you new here? I gave them the benefit of the doubt that it was either stupid or ignorant.
So all you have accomplished in 22 years wasn't do to hard work, your own aptitude, your perseverance? It was all luck? I've never believed this was a meritocracy but come on.
I don't understand. You think people get rich by being part of the work force?
It was more me trying to gauge how relevant their comment was based on his time being in the real world, the workforce, not just theorizing on a message board.
I think most people working for a living have a strong intuitive notion that the people who run their companies aren't there as a result of competence (for as much as Scott Adams is a dipshit, Dilbert punctuated corporate life specifically because of this being one of the focal points of its strips). If anything I'd say the people who theorize on message boards are much more willing to argue the opposite.
Mostly it's luck starting with being born white in a relatively rich country and going on from there. Even someone's intelligence is down to luck. As for hard work, the hardest working people everywhere will be the poorest earners so that means nothing.
Yep, just keep plugging away, dude. You'll be a billionaire someday, too.
Read their post. I think the "without exception" part is what irked me. If I came off as rude to them I apologize. I think the current system sucks but I don't condemn capitalism so much as human nature and the kind of people who are running the show right now. I mean... even AOC has said she thinks it is possible to be a democratic socialist and a capitalist but our current system makes it increasingly counterintuitive.
I'm doing fine my dude. I asked a question. If you want to amount every accomplishment or every success story to luck you do you.
LOL. Where and to what family you are born largely determines financial success in US life. Hard work doesn't guarantee anything if you weren't born lucky.
It does largely affect your chances of success but I disagree about it being the absolute determiner. Again they used the term "without exception". Follow the thread
I've mentioned it before in other threads but when someone uses the word "luck", a lot of people have an instinctual aversion to it because they think it diminishes their efforts (and in a way it does), but the statistical outcomes cannot be denied.
There is a similar effect with "privilege", where people accused of privilege think that it renders their work meaningless. Again, it's personally offputting but on a socio-economic level the effects are self-evident.
There is a similar effect with "privilege", where people accused of privilege think that it renders their work meaningless. Again, it's personally offputting but on a socio-economic level the effects are self-evident.
Yeah I agree with this. I can't really think of a better way to put it Chance maybe?
The also said "mostly through luck", so what are you even arguing about?
I agree but I feel this will fall on deaf ears.
Someone on the old forum tried to reason that luck and privilege plays a part but only to a certain agree going by mathematical probabilities.
Not knowing that I have a heavy background ground in mathematics, I kindly asked what is the probability of being born a white male, in a first world country in the 21st century and above the poverty line?
He or she never responded.
Yes, I'm reasonable enough to accredit a lot of my success to luck. I'm not accrediting it solely to luck, though. I didn't maneuver myself to where I am through sheer tyranny of will, but I didn't fall ass-backwards into it, either. Luck puts people in a position where they can use their aptitude, drive, and perseverance. Luck sets the starting line, and everything flows from there.
Luck also comes into play all throughout your life - who you meet, familial sicknesses, trauma - your life isn't entirely under your control. Hard work can mitigate some setbacks, but it's not the sole determiner.
Also, I know lots of well-off people who are huge fucking idiots who barely work.
So everyone who isn't rich is just inept or lazy, then. Got it.
Reagan should be demonized more. He's the one that started the whole "Government is the problem" and "Reaganomics" making all of today's GOP following this stupid practice because they know they will receive millions in donations by the millions/billionaires to lower their taxes. All for the debt to blow up, starting a recession and causing states like Kansas where the tax cuts experiment failed.
Meanwhile the Right demonize socialism and use "Venezuela" to prove their point and pickpocket you while looking away.
Meanwhile the Right demonize socialism and use "Venezuela" to prove their point and pickpocket you while looking away.
Only way to fix our democracy is 100% to demonize the rich. The reason why we are dealing with this late stage capitalism is from propaganda that demonized unions, demonized social nets and the poor, free healthcare, etc.
Hell, this whole 'demonizing the rich is wrong' is pretty much another set of propaganda FROM THE RICH, lol.
Only way you're going to get change for people to point out the bad guy. This whole 'Hey, we don't want to offend!' is why the world's all fucked up and it's looking like Blade Runner out here but without the cool guns, flying cars and coats.
For people quoting the 'player vs game' if the players are motivated by winning the only way is to make them think that someone's about to flip the chessboard around and the game will be over.
If you really think about it, the whole "We can't demonize them or else they will get mad and we won't get anything!" is a fucking insane line of thought guys, even tho I cracked my dystopian joke I thought we were at least a few decades from being actual serfs, LOL.
Hell, this whole 'demonizing the rich is wrong' is pretty much another set of propaganda FROM THE RICH, lol.
Only way you're going to get change for people to point out the bad guy. This whole 'Hey, we don't want to offend!' is why the world's all fucked up and it's looking like Blade Runner out here but without the cool guns, flying cars and coats.
For people quoting the 'player vs game' if the players are motivated by winning the only way is to make them think that someone's about to flip the chessboard around and the game will be over.
If you really think about it, the whole "We can't demonize them or else they will get mad and we won't get anything!" is a fucking insane line of thought guys, even tho I cracked my dystopian joke I thought we were at least a few decades from being actual serfs, LOL.
19 years. I'm also a POC and came from a low-income family. I'm also not saying luck doesn't play some part but not to the degree some people are saying.
And are you a billlionaire yet? If not why aren't you working hard enough?
I'm in a comfortable tax bracket to the degree one could describe me as well off/wealthy. This thread was about the systemic issue of the rich not billionaires necessarily and , honestly I don't think billionaires should exist when so many people can't end meet but I don't demonize them so much as I demonize the system and greed in general. I work very hard and had years of hustling my ass off. I'm aware of the inequalities though. I never disputed their existence. I'm not going to further defend my life or my career to you though.
That's what separates someone who truly believes in socio-economic justice vs. someone who is just claiming to. That's a false ally, and if it represents your views, it says more about you and your worldview than it does about individuals fighting for that equality. Let me ask you, how do you feel about Brock Turner raping a girl and getting away with it? "Blame the game, not the player," right? You wouldn't actually say this, but it wouldn't be far off from you going to tell me is that "anyone would rape someone if they could get away with it." At which point I'd have to question you more than the moral cause.
The game and the player are one in the same. The game can't exist without the player taking advantage of it; the attempt at separating the two is nothing but justification of immorality.
If the ultra wealthy could exist while the middle class was rapidly widening, maybe it'd just be jealousy.
If laws were applied to them equally, then maybe it's just the wealth causing the jealousy.
If they didn't actively work to destroy consumer protections, reduce competition, and lobby for laws to enhance and protect their wealth, then perhaps you're onto something.
Keep telling that yourself that if that's what you need to hear in order to make peace with your station in life.
Please actually engage. Seems like we should be able to critique an economic system and those who seek to uphold those economic structures without drive by "you mad bro" comments.