Myths of rich and poor

[Preechr]

Ok, here we talking to davin...

Originally Posted by davinxtk

Not... really. The argument for a greater distribution of wealth is a rather nuanced one, provided you're trying to keep some semblence of a capitalist free market alive in your theories. It's not that consideration for the weakest of the community is primary over that for the strongest producers, it's that production is accross the board a rather abstract concept. You can't use the same scale of production for a waiter as you do for a coal miner or a deli clerk or a CPA or a mechanic or a dry-cleaner or a cabbie. Does every one of them need food? Do many of them have families that as well need food? Health care? Housing? Running water, electricity, heat, clothing? Do you think enough consideration is given when setting wages to cover these aspects for everyone who works a full time job? Do you think it's directly related to productivity in even fifty percent of circumstances?

I can do exactly that when I buy into the idea that the cabbie and the waitress go to work with the best interests, at least as best as they can individually discern, of their respective families in mind. Remember, I believe that government is inherently the LEAST effective method of delivery for societal services. You are apparently operating from the point of view that governemnt is inherently the accepted mechanism for this kind of distribution.

We will knock heads on this if that's right, y'know...

You said: "The subtext here is that I feel your devotion to a free market clouds your judgement about the healthiness of its practices."

I would counter that your devotion to altruism has devaluated your priorities in such a way as to have made the concept of personal responsibility about as important to a healthy society as cat hygiene.

Please recall that I'm always giving capitalism a pass on whatever evils might be blamed upon it. If I am devoted obsessively to anything, it is the pipedream of PURE capitalism as it might one day yet exist. Whenever you might point to some sort of "E-e-evil of Capitalism," I'll invariably object that you've chosen to highlight a perfect example of capitalism practiced badly which is only allowed to survive and flourish thanks to an unholy alliance with the incredible power of government, practiced badly.

I'm holding this stance for the same reason you've chosen to allow room in your idealization of life for free markets. I simply refuse to accept that capitalism as we have it is as good as it gets, just as do you. The big difference between us on this is that I think the leash needs to disappear where you think it should be tightened. I accept competition as a natural, healthy part of the human life experience where you believe it should be managed and diluted to the point that nobody gets hurt.

I like the idea that people are naturally punished for bad decisions. I know that that process does in fact exist naturally, and that it's existance has benefitted me personally to a very considerable degree. It's not that I like punishment... it's just that I like the idea that a higher order is existant. I choose not to believe in a human experience based in animalistic existence. You, as it happens, do not. On the whole, you would prefer to believe that the best of us at any given moment are naturally charged with the responsibility for the rest of us.

I just don't think so highly of me.

I recognize that I am quantitatively forwards of most of us standing in this line. I'm willing to bet I can see you and most of us here from my position. I have learned, however, to avoid the entry level trap of believing that my own particular natural excellence has any bearing whatsoever on my immediate future. That, I would submit, is entirely up to me.

Originally Posted by davinxtk

For the most part I agree with the concepts presented here. I must concede to the fact that a decent work ethic is hard to find among many citizens, but in a society that attempts to teach us from day one that we can "do whatever we want" in this "free country" only to be delivered to harsh economic realities often in our teenage years you have to expect at least some discontent. If your argument is that Americans need to toughen up and get down to business, quit fucking around with popular culture and advertisements and bling and cribs and the like and actually do what's best for themselves... how can I argue with you? But this isn't going to be spurred by the poor suddenly waking up and correcting their horrendous spending habits, getting second and third jobs, and finding the motivation (and job openings) to move into management from entry-level positions. The trickle-down economy isn't quite working right, too much of the resources flow immediately back to the top.

There's a reason for that. Care to guess where I'm gonna point you now? I've already told you. Hint: Bad Capitalism.

Just because Republicans glommed onto the term "trickle down" doesn't necessarily mean that they own it's meaning... no moreso than that Communists started calling themselves progressive means that they are for progress or that Bud Light actually tastes better than something.

Trickle down works. What we have is not a trickle down economy. What we have is a managed economy. You, just like most of the folks that might be reading this, were born a bit above the rest of us in terms of what with which you might be one day sucessfully accused.

Originally Posted by davinxtk

The initial sacrifices are going to have to be made by the rich, as it's the poor who need the leg-up..

Since you typed this in, I have gone on to state pretty boldly that the false reality that wants you to believe that discouraging the activity of producers might somehow encourage non-producers to get up off the couch and make fucking something out of them-fucking-selves is pretty much a load of crap, so I will try my best to avoid restatement of my previously stated position.

If you need a potato, you are the one I can trust most to make sure that need is fulfilled. Should I go to the potato farm and steal you a potato? What about the farm owner? Why is it somehow better if I steal your potato when you won't? Somewhere, the idea that you might be inspired to seek your own potato goals by the example of my own potato growth success has gotten lost in favor of some sort of sick-ass, twisted version of how things really work...

You said you believed in a work ethic, and you implied that you understood that you get the value of capitalism in at least a general sense. I'm thinking you can work out where I'm headed here. It's way too late now for me to keep this up. Throw me some of what you got in the way of argument.