06-01-2002, 06:40 AM | #31 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Thats what they just like you to think, and what they like to think. No one is self-made. It is our social being that makes our private selves possible. All of us benefit from and contribute to society and its institutions. The large variations in wealth among individuals are not due to inherent differences between individuals. At best, the differences are mainly in the different ways individuals are able to access and use society's resources. At worse, the differences are wholly arbitrary. |
|
06-01-2002, 06:46 AM | #32 |
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: Tacoma, WA, U.S.A.
Age: 39
Posts: 2,615
|
And at best they used their brains and ambition to start a business that was highly successful. Then they also give a lot to charity and community programs. Sure they dont give 70 percent of their checks but neither does anyone else.
"The large variations in wealth among individuals are not due to inherent differences between individuals" Yes they are. Lazy people will settle for low paying jobs or sit back and collect welfare. [ 06-01-2002, 06:49 AM: Message edited by: caleb ] |
06-01-2002, 06:49 AM | #33 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
The concept of a formal private ownership that takes precedence over social obligation is based on the myth that society has little or nothing to do with the production of wealth, i.e. all millionaires are supposedly "self-made men" who got their wealth "the old-fashioned way, by earning it." What ever you choose to say, the free market is fundamentally flawed since you can only make people better off, when you make others worse off. But there is no such thing as the free market even, since all markets operate in uneven fields of power that have an impact on transactions between buyer and seller. Nor is the free market desirable, since market forces are destructive to both social and environmental issues. Markets, which are guided by proactive intelligence (to a certain extent), however, can be a dynamic and creative force. |
|
06-01-2002, 06:50 AM | #34 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
[ 06-01-2002, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: Dramnek_Ulk ] |
|
06-01-2002, 07:00 AM | #35 |
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: Tacoma, WA, U.S.A.
Age: 39
Posts: 2,615
|
So that 21 year old single mother that decided to drop out of school, pop out kids and be a house wife to her boyfriend the fry cook instead of hitting the books, going to college, and majoring in a field that will get her lots of money like the rich guy did earned her welfare check and that rich guy is a parasite?
|
06-01-2002, 07:07 AM | #36 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Because of the rich poor gap, that is so evident in America. The reason why the rich guy gets a major is because his parents were already rich, thus perpetuating the cycle of oppression. POWAR TO THE PEOPLE! |
|
06-01-2002, 07:09 AM | #37 | |
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: Tacoma, WA, U.S.A.
Age: 39
Posts: 2,615
|
Quote:
|
|
06-01-2002, 07:12 AM | #38 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
The reason why people feel the need to cheat the state, is because it is not representative of them nor does it embodies them, It is merely an instrument of the dominant class, i.e the rich, in Americas case, and the middle classes in Europe. |
|
06-01-2002, 07:13 AM | #39 | |
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: Tacoma, WA, U.S.A.
Age: 39
Posts: 2,615
|
Quote:
[ 06-01-2002, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: caleb ] |
|
06-01-2002, 07:17 AM | #40 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
If I own something, I have decisive power over that object. I should be able to do with it what I want. This can cause problems, since many of the things which can be owned can also be used in ways that society must restrict. One example is product liability law. If I produce and market a product which is later shown to be harmful to my customers, I can be held responsible for the damages and forced to compensate the victims. but the fundmental fact is that In bourgeois society, individual liberty and the private ownership of property are the fundamental values. Prior to the bourgeois revolution, most power and wealth belonged to the church and the throne. Individual privacy, to the extent that it could be defined at all, was wholly subordinate to autocracy and theocracy. The rising bourgeoisie had to assert the primacy of private property into order secure the wealth it was amassing through the slave trade, manufacture and the looting of the new world. It wanted to multiply this wealth by recycling it as capital and thus liberating the productive forces from the restrictions of medieval or despotic society. Private property in this sense was a revolutionary force undermining the old order. While this view of private property has some historical justification, the concept of a formal private ownership that takes precedence over social obligation does not. The latter is based on the myth that society has little or nothing to do with the production of wealth [ 06-01-2002, 07:18 AM: Message edited by: Dramnek_Ulk ] |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Democrats should reimburse taxpayers $40 million for their convention | Night Stalker | General Discussion | 6 | 08-09-2004 05:20 PM |
Tax Cut Taxpayers Need Most | Timber Loftis | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 2 | 06-18-2003 01:09 PM |
how is your day spent in Amn? | Odin IV | Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal | 1 | 10-06-2002 01:09 PM |
Poor Bobo, should have spent those points on Intelligence... | Jon Smallberries | Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) | 5 | 01-14-2002 11:31 PM |
Which game have you spent the most time playing? | Dying Sun | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 15 | 04-07-2001 04:58 AM |