PDA

View Full Version : Why the hate for the rich?



CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-12-2010, 11:40 AM
First off, I want to say that I personally am FAR from rich--Solidly middle class--So I'm not speaking from a position of bias here. I have noticed that many on the far, far left, however, have this big issue with the wealthy--that they're horrible people or something. I've never really gotten it, personally. I can understand not respecting someone who is a wealthy brat who inherited their wealth and then did nothing good with it--Whatever. I would personally think they could do better with their money, but I'd also recognize that it's their money.

But those who are self made, those who became wealthy through the work of their own hand--I am not one of these people, and so if I were a Leftist, I would envy and hate them, but I don't; I admire them, and say congrats. I would hope they'd spend at least some of it on helping society (I know I would were I rich), but again, that's their choice. I don't see any reason to hold any rancor or hatred for them.

Perhaps Wei or another Socialist type here can explain this whole "hate the rich" mindset.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 11:54 AM
It's not that they are bad people. Wealthy capitalists have to compete with other wealthy capitalists, just like working class Americans have to compete for jobs with other working class Americans.

the nature of this competition means that in order to stay wealthy, you need to be very good at maximizing profits, or some other capitalist will take your place.

Now this is clearly not true when we have monopolies or institutions that are "too big to fail", which is why I think both of these need to be addressed. However, this can only happen because of what wealth accumulation does.

Again, it's nothing personal against the people, the problem is systemic - what happens to a society when most of the wealth is held by 1-2% of the population? extreme social problems.

extreme wealth inequality is linked to high social problems.

let me give an example: for-profit health industry. we have extraordinarily high costs for medical care, most people cannot even afford it without insurance, so we have a robust private insurance system. Insurance works, that is, it makes a profit, by maximizing the money people pay into it, and mimizing the payments going out to people who need it. There are fleets of people who's sole job is to find any way to deny you coverage in order to save the company money.

This is because in the private coporate world, profits come first, everyhting else is comes second. Sometimes this is a good thing, like designing toys or pleasurable consumer goods. Other times, it's not, like when we are trying to meet a social need whose importance is greater than that of profits.

What we get is a system that benefits from people being denied health care, there are wealthy people who gets a fat $250,000 bonus for denying so many people the help they need, and saving profits in the end.

Does this make these people evil? I don't know, they are simply doing their job and if they don't put profits first and they allow the company stock prices to drop because they want to "do the right thing" they will be fired so fast.


I'll probably have a lot to post in this thread but to start I just want to emphasize that it's not the wealthy people that is the problem, it's the accumulation of ridiculous amounts of wealth into extremely concentrated hands, giving the people who hold it more power over our Republic than the voters who lect our representatives.

Extreme accumulations of wealth undermines democracy.

Apache
12-12-2010, 12:09 PM
Extreme accumulations of wealth undermines democracy.

George Soros being a prime example...

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:10 PM
Good thing we don't have or want a democracy.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:13 PM
George Soros being a prime example...

Actually yes, he is. The right loves to point to Soros because he is a liberal capitalist but they're proving exactly what I mean.

Think about how much Glenn Beck talks about Soros, how powerful he seems, behind the scenes, like a puppeteer, all possible because of his wealth.

Well, that's pretty true, but for every Soros there are a dozen Murdochs or Kochs or other billionaires who actively fund right-wing organizations.

Whether they are liberal or conservative, billionaire capitalists have more control over our country than working, voting, Americans.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:16 PM
If we rephrase the question from "Why hate the rich?" into the more accurate "What's wrong with enormous wealth accumulation?" , then we can look at the 8-hour Bernie Sanders Filibuster.

Now, there's no need to watch 8 hours of video, he repeated himself a lot. However, if you just tune into the beginning, middle, or end of his speech and listen for 10-20 minutes you will hear a LOT of factual evidence of how extreme wealth accumulation affects our nation.


Some people decided that this speech needs to be looping forever somewhere so they set up this website:

http://filibernie.com/

just click it, listen for 10-20 minutes, there's so much there.

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:17 PM
Actually yes, he is. The right loves to point to Soros because he is a liberal capitalist but they're proving exactly what I mean.

Think about how much Glenn Beck talks about Soros, how powerful he seems, behind the scenes, like a puppeteer, all possible because of his wealth.

Well, that's pretty true, but for every Soros there are a dozen Murdochs or Kochs or other billionaires who actively fund right-wing organizations.

Whether they are liberal or conservative, billionaire capitalists have more control over our country than working, voting, Americans.

How does Soros qualify as a capitalist? He made his money trading currency. How is that capitalist?

Starbuck
12-12-2010, 12:20 PM
............Whether they are liberal or conservative, billionaire capitalists have more control over our country than working, voting, Americans.

People love to believe that, but Meg Whitman found that not to be the case.
So did Ross Perot.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:25 PM
How does Soros qualify as a capitalist? He made his money trading currency. How is that capitalist?

A pretty good point actually, what do you think makes someone a capitalist? Exploiting surplus labor? It's a bit of a tricky definition with modern convoluted financial markets where the big bucks are.

Well, soros undermined the Communist system in hungary in support of a capitalist system which he benefited from. Perhaps he's not a Capitalist in the strict classical sense, but practically speaking he's just like the rest of them, taking all the money in the morning and giving half of it away in the afternoon and washing his hands of all the people who suffer from his games.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:28 PM
People love to believe that, but Meg Whitman found that not to be the case.
So did Ross Perot.

That's because being wealthy and outside of government gives you more power than being upper-middle class and inside of government.

You should not believe that the only source of power is from elected office. Wealthy billionaires don't need to be elected, and both Democrats and Republicans can be bought with ease if you've got enough money.

Who do you think has more social power? A Senator from Vermont or Rupert Murdoch? Your local elected congressmen or the man who owns the factory that employs 80% of your town?

Rockntractor
12-12-2010, 12:28 PM
Exploiting surplus labor?

Why is labor surplus and why would employing them of their own free will be exploiting them?

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:29 PM
A pretty good point actually, what do you think makes someone a capitalist? Exploiting surplus labor? It's a bit of a tricky definition with modern convoluted financial markets where the big bucks are. Fuck - you can't control your bias at all can you. :rolleyes: capitalism is actually quite easy to define. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Capitalism.html


Well, soros undermined the Communist system in hungary in support of a capitalist system which he benefited from. Perhaps he's not a Capitalist in the strict classical sense, but practically speaking he's just like the rest of them, taking all the money in the morning and giving half of it away in the afternoon and washing his hands of all the people who suffer from his games.

Soros is not a capitalist - he's an opportunist.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:39 PM
Telling someone work and be exploited or starve and die is not a free choice. When your options are let your children go hungry or be exploited it's not fair to say that it's "not really exploitation because you can always choose to starve".

It's surplus labor because workers end up performing unpaid labor. This is where profits come from. A worker works (let's say) 40% of his day producing a good or service which either creates a resource, trades it, or minimizes operating costs. In that 40% of the day he produces the amount of wealth necessary to pay for the cost of his own salary. the other 60% of the time he's producing wealth that goes directly into the pockets of the owner, and the worker isn't paid for this labor. Profit comes from this "surplus value", which is unpaid labor. While owners may do managerial work (which can often be done by managers), it is possible for a business owner to do no actual productive work at all, instead living off of the surplus labor from his workers.


I know I'm not the best at explaining things succinctly so on this point I'd like to post a short video with someone explaining this better than I am able to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFDVb5x-npk

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=658A06660848E2D8 educate yourself wee wee.

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4

Rockntractor
12-12-2010, 12:45 PM
Telling someone work and be exploited or starve and die is not a free choice. When your options are let your children go hungry or be exploited it's not fair to say that it's "not really exploitation because you can always choose to starve".

It's surplus labor because workers end up performing unpaid labor. This is where profits come from. A worker works (let's say) 40% of his day producing a good or service which either creates a resource, trades it, or minimizes operating costs. In that 40% of the day he produces the amount of wealth necessary to pay for the cost of his own salary. the other 60% of the time he's producing wealth that goes directly into the pockets of the owner, and the worker isn't paid for this labor. Profit comes from this "surplus value", which is unpaid labor. While owners may do managerial work (which can often be done by managers), it is possible for a business owner to do no actual productive work at all, instead living off of the surplus labor from his workers.


I know I'm not the best at explaining things succinctly so on this point I'd like to post a short video with someone explaining this better than I am able to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFDVb5x-npk
It's a shame you couldn't did up Marx, Mao or Lenin, they could explain it the best.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=658A06660848E2D8 educate yourself wee wee.

really great stuff policon, i've watched a few of these videos on youtube but I haven't looked to find them all on this playlist

should offer plenty of material to think about

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:52 PM
really great stuff policon, i've watched a few of these videos on youtube but I haven't looked to find them all on this playlist

should offer plenty of material to think aboutSkip youtube and get this: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3369921/Milton_Friedman_-_Free_To_Choose__all_15_episodes_1980_-_1990

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 12:55 PM
Skip youtube and get this: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3369921/Milton_Friedman_-_Free_To_Choose__all_15_episodes_1980_-_1990

a goldmine

thanks. i'll have plenty of interesting things to read/watch during my downtime around the holidays

PoliCon
12-12-2010, 12:55 PM
a goldmine

thanks. i'll have plenty of interesting things to read/watch during my downtime around the holidays

and we'll all know if you actually watch it too.

NJCardFan
12-12-2010, 02:37 PM
Telling someone work and be exploited or starve and die is not a free choice. When your options are let your children go hungry or be exploited it's not fair to say that it's "not really exploitation because you can always choose to starve".
Earn what they get? Oh, the horror!:eek: Who is being exploited? Give me some fucking names you twerp. Give me the name of an exploited worker. Just one.

BadCat
12-12-2010, 02:58 PM
a goldmine

thanks. i'll have plenty of interesting things to read/watch during my downtime around the holidays

Downtime?

Taking some time off from hating rich (anyone that makes more than you do ) people?

Taking some time off from thinking N.Korea is superior to the USA because they've never USED their nuclear weapons?

You could do all of us a favour by taking some time off from posting here.

Wei Wu Wei
12-12-2010, 03:18 PM
Banned again? welp

Rockntractor
12-12-2010, 03:47 PM
Banned again? welp

You haven't said anything new since you came back, go ahead surprise us, an original thought?:confused:

Starbuck
12-12-2010, 08:00 PM
.........Who do you think has more social power? A Senator from Vermont or Rupert Murdoch? Your local elected congressmen or the man who owns the factory that employs 80% of your town?
Not sure what "social power" is, but I guess I don't really care. We're not talking about law making power here, and the only other power anyone has is the power I give him. And I don't give most people much.

lacarnut
12-12-2010, 08:34 PM
Not sure what "social power" is, but I guess I don't really care. We're not talking about law making power here, and the only other power anyone has is the power I give him. And I don't give most people much.

He/she/it does not know either. The stupid is strong in Wee Wee.

NJCardFan
12-12-2010, 10:22 PM
Earn what they get? Oh, the horror!:eek: Who is being exploited? Give me some fucking names you twerp. Give me the name of an exploited worker. Just one.

I'm still waiting for wee wee to give me the name of an exploited worker.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-12-2010, 10:25 PM
I'm still waiting for wee wee to give me the name of an exploited worker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA

Odysseus
12-12-2010, 10:50 PM
I'm still waiting for wee wee to give me the name of an exploited worker.

I'll give you more than one. Every one of us who pays taxes is exploited, but not by our employers (well, except for mine, but that's because I work for the government:o). We're paying taxes for services that we don't use, retirement benefits that we will never see, medical care that is inferior to the market plans and a host of other idiocies that sound good to Washington bureaucrats and career politicians, but are of far less value to me than the food on my table, the roof over my family's heads and the clothes on our backs.

And Wei, the reason that we cite Soros is because, unlike Murdoch and Koch, Soros deliberately uses his money to undermine our democratic institutions. His Secretaries of State Project was specifically tailored to rig elections in the states. His Open Society funds groups that attack America from within and without. Murdoch's only "crime" is presenting information that people are free to consume or not consume, and the Koch's sole "crime" is backing groups that seek to reduce the bloat of the US government. Even Soros' fortune is dubious, since his currency manipulations cause untold suffering and poverty by raping the savings of people throughout the world. Soros isn't a problem because he's rich, he's a problem because he's evil. If he were poor, he'd have less influence, but he'd still be evil.

Lanie
12-12-2010, 11:31 PM
First off, I want to say that I personally am FAR from rich--Solidly middle class--So I'm not speaking from a position of bias here. I have noticed that many on the far, far left, however, have this big issue with the wealthy--that they're horrible people or something. I've never really gotten it, personally. I can understand not respecting someone who is a wealthy brat who inherited their wealth and then did nothing good with it--Whatever. I would personally think they could do better with their money, but I'd also recognize that it's their money.

But those who are self made, those who became wealthy through the work of their own hand--I am not one of these people, and so if I were a Leftist, I would envy and hate them, but I don't; I admire them, and say congrats. I would hope they'd spend at least some of it on helping society (I know I would were I rich), but again, that's their choice. I don't see any reason to hold any rancor or hatred for them.

Perhaps Wei or another Socialist type here can explain this whole "hate the rich" mindset.

The common belief is that most rich people were born with a silver spoon, had everything handed to them, and really don't know their butt from a hole in the ground. Far from it. I've found most rich people or upper middle class to be really likeable people. Most of them will help those in need. Most of them are not necessarily known nothing brats.