Users who Dugg This
Iamamaniac
2402 Followers
Iamamaniac
2402 Followers
Cass Anderson
15055 Followers
Cass Anderson
15055 Followers
Shelly Cooper
1378 Followers
Shelly Cooper
1378 Followers
porkfriedriceAug 18, 2010
you cant be broke and happy, so me im mad rich
im talkin young money s**t
namja23Aug 19, 2010
I started on my 3rd million this year.
Failed miserably for 2 years before that.
infinitewithinAug 19, 2010
Yea making millions is so easy these days, the Elite are basically giving the money away.
/s
random314Aug 19, 2010
you can scam old lonely people's life insurance away... depends on how low you want to go.... believe it or not, there are people out there who actually do this. They spend a 10, 20 thousand bucks to make abandoned old folks last few years better in exchange for their millions in life insurance...
dralhaAug 19, 2010
In short: the rich are selfish animals, the poor are compassionate human beings. That's the way it's always been. That's why "trickle down" economics is a steaming pile.
mweatherAug 19, 2010
That's why the rich are rich and the poor are poor. Getting rich is actually pretty easy if you have loose morals.
stradenkoAug 19, 2010
I guess that means your mother is loaded.
mweatherAug 19, 2010
Clever. Think that up yourself, did you?
kingmanicAug 19, 2010
The lack of morality won't help you get rich. you need a bit of talent, a bit of luck, and the right parents.
shwaavayAug 19, 2010
You obviously don't have the first clue about the concept of trickle down economics; so you should just shut it.
Here's a clue: it's not about charity.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
He is right, trickle down economics deals with the notion that acquire wealth will be spent (yachts, private jets, etc)... and those goods will produce markets that will bring jobs and opportunities to the poor, and thus increase their net worth.
The belief that the rich will simply give away all their wealth is an idea from the Gilded Age... not usually what people are talking about when they discuss "trickle down economics".
mweatherAug 19, 2010
Give a million to a millionaire, and he'll but a single supercar. Split a million between 50 poor people, and they'll buy 50 cars.
Which provides more economic benefit to the lower classes?
rentalcanoeAug 19, 2010
Actually, give a million dollars to a millionaire and he'll keep the vast majority of it. Give a million dollars to 50 poor people and they'll put nearly all of it back into the economy.
shwaavayAug 19, 2010
@Rentalcanoe
When this Millionaire is keeping the "vast majority" of the million he is given, is he keeping it under a mattress or is it invested in prosperity? Those are the only two options for what one can do with money they are not "spending"Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mweatherAug 19, 2010
"invested in prosperity"
Lol, I like that euphamism. I prefer "the rich getting richer", as it's more honest.
shwaavayAug 19, 2010
Regardless of the effect on the rich, investment in the economy is good for everyone.
homercles337Aug 19, 2010
"...the first clue about the concept of trickle down economics..."
Is that it is the most clever lie ever created to steal from the middle class and the poor. Historians will put it at the top of the list of most successful lies ever--right up there with the "libjural medjia" lie.
jeffwmartinAug 19, 2010
@MWeather, where is this million dollars coming from?
jasonlimanAug 19, 2010
@Shwaavay
Indeed, they put the money under the mattress, in order order, in the bank. Do you know how the rich invest? They use your money to invest.
brian7581Aug 19, 2010
Honestly, from the looks of most (most not all) of the comments, it sounds like many of you may be too jaded by articles about "Forbe's most wealthiest" and/or how so many big business CEOs paid themselves an ungodly amount of money they didn't deserve.
Being "rich" financially in itself naturally is a subjective thing, but in my opinion there are MYRIADS of people who are "rich" financially who have succeeded purely based on talent and a little bit of luck. It doesn't necessarily take "rich" parents or "loose" morals to get rich. In fact, I'm willing to bet that those who start up businesses and fight teeth and nail, (without rich parents or loose morals) end up with better financially stable successful companies. Those who have rich parents may rely on something to fall back on, so they don't feel the fire under their butts. With loose morals, there's always a price to pay (not necessarily financial) much sooner than later.
Lastly, I agree with "Shwaavay" statement of "invested in prosperity", as what I believe he means setting up a company, creating jobs for people, and having 50 people EARN their 50 cars. Perhaps some day, with hard work and fervor, some of these people will have enough to get "rich", turn around and do the same. No this is not an "ideal" world scenario I'm talking about. I'm not saying there aren't people out there that screw people over and then buy yachts, etc. I'm saying it is MUCH less of a population that do that than you probably think.
mweatherAug 19, 2010
"@MWeather, where is this million dollars coming from? "
Tax cuts.
waspbrAug 19, 2010
no, it's about driving the whole world economy into the gutter, getting bailed out by governments and giving big bonuses to the people that were responsible for it.
denizen42Aug 19, 2010
But the people tolerate it
fingerbakerAug 20, 2010
NOT FOREVER!!!
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
"In short: the rich are selfish animals, the poor are compassionate human beings."
So...rich people are less than human? But the poor are all compassionate?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
theundertokerAug 19, 2010
Yep
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
You see nothing remotely dangerous in the generalization and the "hate all the rich people" mentality?
bluto36Aug 19, 2010
i can think of a few times and a few place that this reminds me of...
they all seemed to end up in a lot of misery and death of poor people at the hands of a few powerful people.
weird... its almost like the people that buy into the class warfare thing are all retards willing to walk to their own demise for the benefit of a few powerful people.
anyway, rich people suck! lets all put on the the Guy Fawkes mask and go get em!
brian7581Aug 19, 2010
Walk to their own demise? Interesting. Ever consider that you yourself have the opportunity to be a "powerful" person yourself (whatever way you'd like to describe powerful).
Further, if in a few, you mean several millions of successful people in our great nation, then yes, I guess I'm retarded.
In the world you are talking about, everyone works the same hours, everyone puts forth the same amount of effort and everyone gets paid the same. I don't know personally, but you may be a hard worker yourself. Wouldn't it piss you off to know that a person next to you works half the time with half the effort you put into something to get EXACTLY the same compensation, vacation, etc. as you? Believe me, I know the reverse applies, it also pisses me off to see some high level executives get a bunch of perks for working half the time, with half the effort as well. But instead of accepting it, I choose different pathways that are available to me which allow for me to maximize my effort and in turn, hopefully maximize my successes to turn around to help inspire others to do the same (no not because I have rich parents).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
brian7581Aug 20, 2010
Got to love being dugg down during debate and no comment. Apparently, I hurt someone's "feelings" and got "disliked". =)
Seriously, would like to hear the rebuttal please?
generalobviousAug 19, 2010
"In short: the rich are selfish animals, the poor are compassionate human beings."
LOL.
Walk through the outskirts of Detroit alone and come back and repeat that line...
bluto36Aug 19, 2010
this is were you dont get it.
rich people know they are animals so they hire police, security and grounds keepers and stuff to keep them from eating and raping themselves. this also keeps the poor out and the del tacos looking nice.
meanwhile the poor cant afford to do the same so they have no way to protect themselves from the marauding bands of rich butt eating barbarian robber hordes that pillage them.
that is why Detroit is so Awful... the rich and beautiful from Pontiac keep coming in and pummeling the good Detroit folk.
generalobviousAug 19, 2010
No, trust me, I get it. I think YOU don't get it.
The people who claim that "rich are animals and poor are nice" are delusional.
Your entire post made me LOL, because it just shows you're extremely bitter.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shwaavayAug 19, 2010
Hey GeneralObvious, I think you missed the obvious sarcasm...
bluto36Aug 19, 2010
the middle class are the ones hired by the rich to keep the rich from eating and crapping on themselves and to clean it up and/or blame it on the poor when it does happen... and oh boy does it.
oh course there will always be some posers middle class and poor that try to act rich but thats why we have the democrat party
ricksiteAug 19, 2010
Trickle down economics isn't about charity. When the rich save or spend money, it goes into the economy (i.e. trickles down) to other people.
ultimisAug 19, 2010
The rich don't have swimming pools full of money that they go dive to on a daily base and burn at night. Their money is either spent or invested. Invested money helps new businesses or old businesses grow and create jobs "trickling down" to the "poor". Spent money (unless spent outside of the U.S.) goes to hire workers to build the items/services that they desire thus trickling down.
This isn't a hard concept. Any rich person that does not invest their money is a complete and absolute moron that won't be rich for long.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mweatherAug 20, 2010
Most investment is institutional. What does that mean? The rich don't invest their money. They invest YOUR money.
zenmojoAug 19, 2010
Scientists..nothing but a bunch of liberal douchebags making the tenuously and rightfully wealthy feel bad.
I should buy an extra iPhone. Make myself feel better.
hetmanAug 19, 2010
And the middle class suffers from debt and depression.
elcadAug 19, 2010
The middle class suffers a delusion that their middle class.
n0diggityAug 19, 2010
that their middle class what? what is their middle class doing?
elcadAug 19, 2010
ok, you go me. Should be "The middle class suffers a delusion that they're middle class." Damn, this middle class education.
rudeturnipAug 19, 2010
This. The middle class thinks they are entitled to things like $50,000 weddings and the ability to waste fresh water on their wasteful front lawns. They suffer from prole drift.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cedexAug 19, 2010
You go me where?!
smotpokerAug 19, 2010
The poor suffer from those, too. They just whine about it less and try harder to be pure of spirit because they are more likely to see others are suffering worse (and have usually suffered worse themselves)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cr12345Aug 19, 2010
Unfortunately, the middle class is now considered "the rich", because they are not poor.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
The ironic part about the middle class is they make nearly the same as the "proletarians" (aka, plumbers, electricians, factory workers, etc). In fact, the only huge difference is that blue collar workers have more work related injuries. Yet, we don't see high schools encouraging students to go into certain trades, since it is "below" most people to do dirty jobs. In fact, guidance councilors encourage everyone to attend college... even though many students don't have the IQ to benefit from higher education. Thus, we set them up for failure and burden them with debt. But fear not... with grade inflation, anyone can get a college degree with enough time. Thus, in the end... we have created a new class system between the "college educated" and those without the degree.
Just remember back to the news report about the financial problems with American automakers. Every newspaper ran editorials about the lucrative pay of factory workers. Somehow, it was obscene to the middle class that the "common people" earned similar income to them. Personally, I find this hilariously... especially as the middle-class engages in bragging about how they don't shop at Wal Mart (as if that was some accomplishment).
Really, elitism exists everywhere... just the middle class is particularly clueless about their wealth.
joemanmanAug 19, 2010
what middle class?
m0lluskAug 19, 2010
tax and regulate debt and depression
ronpauliskingAug 19, 2010
on behalf of the poor, we want the money
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
Then go make some. While the morality of bailouts and theft from the taxpayers is questionable, I don't think wealth creation is evil. I'm under the impression that some people think that if you have wealth, you must have stolen it from someone else (zero-sum game), and others understand that you can create wealth. I reduce it to this analogy: You and your neighbor both own a farm. You work twice as hard and twice as many hours, and end up with twice as much crop harvest as your neighbor. Since you now have twice as much harvest as he does now, does that mean that you stole any of it from him? Also, does he have the right to take a little bit from you now, and maybe take some himself, or maybe give some to some other poor person in town, because you have twice as much harvest?
Also check out this Penn & Teller's Obamanomics clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMzf9QzaNI8Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mrerrAug 19, 2010
You made a false assumption. Hard work does not always correspond to money made.
wilcocolaAug 19, 2010
You have a very over-simplified view of the world that fails to account for many, many factors in establishing and maintaining wealth.
athinnesAug 19, 2010
It's becoming increasingly harder and harder to "create wealth". This is where the problem lies.
geogeerAug 19, 2010
True - hard work does not always create wealth, but sloth never does.
d3dmAug 19, 2010
You made a false assumption. Diggtards want to eat the rich and nothing you say will change their minds.
spectecjrAug 19, 2010
Sure it does. If I invest money into tech stocks, I can easily get a 120% to 150% return if I pick the right ones (not hard; follow the ubiquity). I'll pay less taxes than if I worked a day job, and I'll get a higher return too - if I have enough money to put into the system.
I'll be able to spend the other 360 days of the year doing cocaine off strippers' asses on my yacht. Now that's how you do sloth.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
@ wilcocola
My family came here from the former Soviet Union 20 years ago, when I was just a little kid, with little to no money, and two big suitcases of clothes. 20 years later, I'm running a business which employs 13 people, and I live comfortably and productively. I started from scratch and figured it all out myself. It took a LOT of hard work, perseverance, faith, risk-taking, sacrifice, sleepless nights, anxiety, and being humbled to the point of tears. My company has paid more just in state sales tax in the last two years than you will ever pay in income tax in your entire life.
My very over-simplified view of the world did just that for me, helped me establish and maintain wealth. I'm not saying it's the only path to creating wealth, but it's one that has worked throughout history (given the right type of society and economic system), and it's one that has worked for me, and it's one that I'm sure most of you would believe right away once you've tried to create some wealth using hard work. Whats your worldview, and what has it done for you?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
...I correct myself on my sales tax comment. That is in fact collected by us on the behalf of being paid by our customers. Replace sales tax with corporate tax. The burn still applies ;)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
athinnesAug 19, 2010
@Dan6963
I am really glad everything worked out for you, but in reality, most people don't find this success, no matter how hard they work. The fact is most small businesses fail, most people in your position do not become successful. The gap between the rich and the poor is growing, and "creating wealth" is becoming harder and harder. Sure there are people like yourself, but most are not. To equate success to "hard work, perseverance, faith, risk-taking, sacrifice, sleepless nights, anxiety, and being humbled to the point of tears" is foolish. Sure this is a major part of it, but as wilcocola said, there are many other factors. There are people who do this everyday, probably more than you, and are failing at whatever venture they have undertaken.
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
Athinnes, I understand what you are saying, and I agree that the odds are stacked against people more than ever these days, and the economic climate is not nearly as conductive for success as it could be. Maybe it's even stacked to the point of being unfair. But taking wealth from someone else who HONESTLY EARNED AND CRATED IT is still not and never is the answer to the comment of "on behalf of the poor, we want the money" Blame the system, and change the system, but NEVER demand wealth from your honest neighbor.
athinnesAug 19, 2010
I am not really sure what Ronpaulisking meant by his statement, but I don't think he was "demanding" money from the rich. It sounds like more of a joke.
We could go into a massive debate about how the distribution of wealth is good or bad, and I really don't really want to get into that. The fact is something must be done to narrow the gap between rich and poor. If nothing is done, stories like your will become more of a rarity.
ventg4funAug 19, 2010
@Dan - The first farmer in your example probably used monsanto seeds. Just sayin
/s
spectecjrAug 19, 2010
@athinnes - I'm sure that something will happen eventually. The poor won't be able to afford to buy the services that the rich are trying to sell them - and the system will eventually correct. Or the poor will notice that they're getting a raw deal, and will eventually gang up together and kill the rich.
That the thing about fairness; it's a built in, human trait. (Some might even say simian). f**k with the balance of what's fair and what's not too much, and you get exiled - or worse.
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
I correct myself on my sales tax comment. That is in fact collected by us on the behalf of being paid by our customers. Replace sales tax with corporate tax. The burn still applies ;)
ronpauliskingAug 19, 2010
I was just making a joke that people prefer money to actual happiness, but I'm glad it started a lively debate
dan6963Aug 19, 2010
Haha, I get the joke now (sorry I missed it the first time around). I guess I mistook it because that's what the usual sentiment is these days ("Hey, I want HIS money! He has more than me! Life isn't fair! Let's make it fair!")
Go to Cuba if you want life to be fair, folks.
ronpauliskingAug 19, 2010
It's understandable, I wouldn't disagree with you theoretically, but your idea is premised on the idea that we have a free market, we don't, we have a corporate market. As the good Dr. Paul says, in Washington it's either subsidized or banned. so the market is monopolized or pushed underground on almost everything of importance, food, energy, defense, etc. Ideally we would have a free market with a certain level of regulation to it, but what we have is by no means free or fair.
h8f8kesAug 20, 2010
You forgot the /s tag.
blooieAug 19, 2010
BULLs**t!!!!
One of those BS thing.....oh, the rich are not happy....I'm happy when I don't have to stress about money.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
I think you'll find the point is not that one can't have money and be happy, but rather that if you're fundamentally not happy in the first place, money won't change that.
belebihAug 19, 2010
The article is about how the poor tend to be more empathetic and compassionate than the rich, not about whether they are happy or not.
curunirAug 19, 2010
Not exactly. If you read it, it actually says that "Though on the other end, when researchers provoked compassion in the higher-class participants, they were just as much -- if not more -- socially conscious as the lower-class participants."
It seems almost that the poor are able to empathize more with people that have money problems, and are more generous with their money. They *speculate* that the reason is that the poor can empathize more. Also:
"Prior research, found by Piff and his colleagues, suggests lower income people might be more compassionate because they're more closely rooted to and dependent on others, therefore more empathetic."
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
omgscienceAug 19, 2010
Yep I would have to agree with you. I make 6 figures, I'm debt free, and I spend more time doing what I enjoy than working. I must say I am happy. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shauncorleoneAug 20, 2010
I love how you got the wealth envy bury on your comment. People need to start realizing that simply demonizing those with more money than them is not going to make them any money, nor is suckling at the teet of politicians who promise them "social and economic justice".
al3efromanAug 20, 2010
It might be because it's generally considered rude to discuss how much money one makes.
shauncorleoneAug 23, 2010
@al3efroman it used to be. Considering everything up for debate in tax policy these days is based on income, I'd say society w/ the help of government has effectively broken down the barrier of good taste. I'd much prefer going back to a time when no one but you and your employer knew your income.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
Did you bother to RTFA ?
enjoyfailureAug 19, 2010
People are just people. There are assh**es in trailer parks and assh**es in mansions.
boodiddlyoonAug 19, 2010
most logical post on this topic
denizen42Aug 19, 2010
In terms of profit, the current system favors the crooked.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
True. But you miss the point, that on average, people who have less are more giving .. and people that have more are less giving.
diceauAug 20, 2010
Hahahahaahahahaha oh wow, if only you could see what was wrong with what you just said.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
Dugg x 100.
zenmojoAug 19, 2010
There are assh**es in trailer parks and assh**es in mansions. Just a lot more assh**es in mansions.
inajeepAug 19, 2010
However their are many many many more trailer parks than mansions.
snoogsAug 19, 2010
I think it's just that poor people have more babies, which for whatever reason means they're getting laid a whole lot more without the use of condoms or the pill. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
boyprodigy1Aug 19, 2010
This does not explain the combination lack of sex/lack of money which has been keeping me down.
h8f8kesAug 20, 2010
Sounds like the beginning of Idiocracy.
bagos1Aug 20, 2010
Idiocracy! ...a growing movment.
eldonreevesAug 19, 2010
I don't understand how the experiement shows that the world might one day become an economically equal place.
If anything, the rich-poor divide is likely to become even more pronounced.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
The socialist expectation is that the lower and middle classes will eventually succeed in dragging down the upper class so eventually the upper class will cease to exist. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jeffwmartinAug 19, 2010
Which is not what will actually happen. The rich will stay rich and in control and the poor will eventually destroy the middle class. Instead of 1 equal class, we'll have 2 extremely disparate classes.
h8f8kesAug 20, 2010
The wolrd will become equitable when we build the replicator from Star Trek, and limited resources become irrelevant. Until that time, the individual will be respoonsible to take care of themselves and not rely on some fool with thier own agenda to act on thier behalf.
darkmatter911Aug 19, 2010
Sounds like something the poor tell themselves to feel better.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
"the poor" ... so you must be on the other side of the aisle ?
It doesn't make me feel any better to know that tightwad assh**es are hoarding the wealth rather than sharing it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sek82Aug 19, 2010
Or you are too much of a failure to gain some wealth on your own?
Have some pride and don't beg for handouts...
cmatthes1Aug 19, 2010
This doesn't make sense to me, they gave them $10 and said, give it away.
They just kinda skipped over the whole "results" they just "found" that the people at lower incomes gave more of "their" money away. When they are talking about $10 they were given for the single purpose of giving it away.
jeffwmartinAug 19, 2010
I wondered that too. Did they rich try to keep it? Only give it to their friends? A little more info would have been nice.
nepidaeAug 20, 2010
10 dollars is nothing to rich people. If someone gave me a penny and told me to give it away I would just drop it on the ground.
cmatthes1Aug 21, 2010
If you walked up to somebody and gave them a penny... That would make them paranoid.
captininsanityAug 19, 2010
Depends why the poor are giving. Many give to churches out of religion, not necessarily out of altruism.
snoogsAug 19, 2010
It's supposed to be the same thing... A lot of churches use the money to start programs for underprivileged... And some churches use it to build more and bigger churches.
captininsanityAug 19, 2010
I wish the majority did what they were "supposed to"...
infinitewithinAug 19, 2010
captininsanity,
You seem quite insane.
captininsanityAug 19, 2010
Sorry if I sound like I'm being an assh**e, but I used to give to churches. I want to give my money to good causes, but all they did was spend it on getting a nicer building and materials to spread religion. I think there should be a requirement that if an organization is to get tax exempt status it must be using X amount of money for underprivileged people. Too much money from honest generous people is getting diverted to stupid things.
methdwman3Aug 19, 2010
Seems like a flawed study, or maybe the article is presenting incomplete data. How anyone of any economic status would handle $10 given to them does not see like an accurate indicator of how they generally handle their income. They don't even really tell what the various economic groups did with the $10 to arrive at their conclusions.
langfordAug 19, 2010
You want to bring back the middle class? Join a union. Unions created the middle class to begin with.
farkdogAug 19, 2010
Unions had leverage because businesses had no other choice for a labor pool.
Today businesses can set up shop anywhere. Unions have little leverage anymore.
langfordAug 19, 2010
Yeah, but that doesn't make them disadvantageous, it just makes their goal into an uphill hike. Unions are the only groups willing to make demands that would prevent outsourcing or the hiring of illegals.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
curunirAug 19, 2010
f**k that. I've already got a rich bastard exploiting me for his own enrichment. You want me to support *another* rich bastard to exploit me on the *other* side? Now I've got 2 rich bastards fighting over how much they can extract from me for their own purposes.
At least with the one that is actually paying me, he's not taking my money to lobby congress for s**t I don't want.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shwaavayAug 19, 2010
..and then they went over board and created economic crises.
bonestampAug 19, 2010
Most rich people I know are also the cheapest people I know. That's often part of why they're rich.
louiszwuAug 19, 2010
Buffalo bagels. I live paycheck to paycheck. I don't own a car. I have a TV, and computer I built using parts other people threw away. Pretty much the sum total of my material possessions. I can pay rent, utilities, and buy food, and that is it. I can't save for retirement, or a vacation (the last one was 3 years ago. I stayed home.). I might be able to buy a car, but I couldn't afford insurance or gas, so there's little point.
This "pulling yourself by your bootstraps" rhetoric is bull. Always has been. At best, I can tread water.
bonestampAug 19, 2010
As an outsider, I would say two things about changing your situation (assuming that's what you want to do):
1. If you might be able to buy a car, then you might have some money you can save. It's probably not going to support you in retirement, so you need to use it in a better way. Maybe use it to take night classes, get some certifications or some way improve your change of getting a better paying job. Then in a few years you might be able to afford the same lifestyle (or better) and save for retirement.
2. It sounds like you're good with the money you do have, which is great. But, you also have to be just as careful with your time. Maybe you could mow a couple neighbors lawns/week or walk somebody's dog every night for some extra cash. Hanging out on digg is great, but it's not helping you change your situation (although maybe you're at work right now anyway, which could even be worse if you're not doing the things that can help you get ahead there either).
fastrunnernyAug 19, 2010
He wasn't waiting for his next paycheck...he was just trying to scam you by giving you a bad check and keeping the xbox.
louiszwuAug 19, 2010
Not all that concerned for myself. I've lost everything twice in my life. Once from natural disaster, and once as a victim of crime. Poverty doesn't frighten me, and I care little for money, except as a means to an end. Some of it has to do with certain convictions I hold (I will not profit from the misfortune of another).
It's the rhetoric that gets me. The assumption that those who have little are automatically considered to be shiftless and lazy.
It comes down to this, I think. There are two schools of thought regarding the human condition. One says that the world is full of people that are inherently lazy and dishonest and won't do anything right without the constant supervision of the "few" that aren't. The other says that most people are decent, hard-working, and just trying to do the best they can. It troubles me that, as a nation, we seem to be gravitating toward the former.
kalliusAug 19, 2010
Plus, checks can bounce.
bonestampAug 19, 2010
Ya, that's why I said no. The advice was just a bonus.
jeffwmartinAug 19, 2010
craigslist and checks don't mix at all. It's cash or nothing.
charlesdkraussAug 19, 2010
Heart won't pay for food and shelter.
skinturtleAug 19, 2010
It's according to who you sell it to.
vdoogsAug 19, 2010
Yeah, but if you and your friends can pull together Air, Fire, Water and Earth you can make Captain Planet solve all your problems.
Just saying. The power is yours...
h8f8kesAug 20, 2010
Wait, what?
roddackAug 19, 2010
Well you could eat the heart.....
vegetablelambAug 19, 2010
people who hoard wealth are stingy? what a surprise!
richmomzAug 19, 2010
There's probably some truth to that - people that accumulate a lot of material wealth generally fall under two categories:
1) Being smarter and more driven than everyone else, or
2) Being more of a greedy, self-absorbed assh**e than everyone else.
richmomzAug 19, 2010
I should also add:
People who exhibit both of those traits tend to move up VERY far in life, and are often associated with what people typically consider the corporate or political "elite".
Conversely, most of the rest of the population falls under the description of "unexceptionally intelligent or driven, but otherwise generally nice", and generally aren't going to strike it rich absent some phenomenal stroke of good fortune.
ventg4funAug 19, 2010
Good take. I agree
mehanAug 19, 2010
why or? they're not mutually exclusive at all.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
the problem is that people who fit into #1 are in short supply ... so the majority fit into #2
roy5000x2Aug 19, 2010
Money can't buy happiness...not directly at least. It does a great job at buying the median between the two though.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
...it can buy a jet ski though... and have you ever seen anyone frowning on a jet ski?
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
As a delivery driver, I deliver to rich people and poor people. I have come to learn not to expect a good tip just because somebody has a lot of money. I am more grateful though when an average person gives me a good tip because i know they can't really afford to. When a wealthy person gives a good tip I am less grateful because I know it won't hurt them. It depends on the individual and the mood they are in.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thatbuffaloAug 19, 2010
How about you just be grateful you get a good tip when you do and not judge them based on the financial scale of rich or poor. Just because they have a lot of stuff doesn't mean they don't have bills too.
hipmanAug 19, 2010
I don't tip people unless they really go the extra mile.Drop the self-entitlement and be happy when anyone give you a good one.
kingmanicAug 19, 2010
You must enjoy saliva in your food?
In North America they pay most service staff almost nothing. Many delivery drivers make min wage (or less) while burning their own gas. I've been one due to obligations to family. To help out. Most people don't seem to tip based on how long I take. Most tip base don what type of person they are and people like you feel that tip is a optional thing; which would be great if the pay for drivers and thus end food cost accounted for this but it doesn't.
For most drivers if you take out tip; they make less than minimum wage due to gas/vehicle wear and tear. So your tip helps with that. Fortunately assh**es like you are in the minority and tips will generally make up the cost of gas and vehicle wear and tear. It provides very little more than that.
ventg4funAug 19, 2010
From reading some of your other comments on these threads, I don't doubt that a bit.
snoogsAug 19, 2010
I see where this is going... picture trick-or-treating back in the day- the mansions always gave out pencils and gum.
tyrghastAug 19, 2010
Coming from a former delivery person, rich people rarely tip anyway. They don't value hard work in others. It doesn't matter to them that to get their order there on time usually involves busting your ass.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
oh how sweet.
skinturtleAug 19, 2010
A fool and his money shall soon part.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
its called sarcasm
boyprodigy1Aug 19, 2010
Buried for me not being rich...
rudegarAug 19, 2010
people with way too much money may be working all the time and can't enjoy the fruit of their labour
but people who are poor may also work all the time and not get enough fruits of their labour for their family's (and familiars if you're a wizard) to do well
pjone88Aug 19, 2010
The old man in the sky says I have a mansion waiting for me in heaven.
ricksiteAug 19, 2010
I have no choice but to believe you.
pjone88Aug 19, 2010
Glad someone saw the movie, guess the peeps burying me didn't.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
I read an editorial over a couple years ago that compared charitable donations during and after death between the rich and poor.
Simply put, the rich gave less of a percentage of their income to charity while living... but gave much more of their lifetime earned-income away after death, compare to the poor. Simply put, the ultra-rich tended to create foundations and charitable causes that they believed in.... try to acquire as much wealth as possible.... and then pass on that wealth in their will (in stead of simply giving it all to their children... as the poor/lower-middle class did).
roddackAug 19, 2010
Pretty much
I remember an interview with Buffet when he was asked why he didn't give much to charity at the time and his response was basically its better for him to keep making money and investing it so that when he does pass on he will be able to provide not only a large some of money to a charity but also one that will keep providing resources.
blaqreaperAug 19, 2010
"The man who leaves money to charity in his will is only giving away what no longer belongs to him."
-Voltaire
Not that I oppose charity after death, but the money is useless to the dead anyways, they might as well give the extra they have away.
thatbuffaloAug 19, 2010
Well no f**king duh the lower income brackets give "more". They give a higher percentage of their earnings because they make less. If a rich person were to give to charity the same percentage of their check the lower-income individuals give, then the rich would be donating a lot more money.
sangjmoonAug 19, 2010
This is as old as the Bible. It is easier for the rich man to part with his wealth than the poor. So why aren't you all burning Bill Gates and Warren Buffet in virtual effigy? In the latest Forbes list, they are listed as the top two richest people in the USA. Is it because they are Democrats and donate money to Democrats?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
skinturtleAug 19, 2010
Bill isn't a bad guy personally...considering how much he's dumping into charities.
sangjmoonAug 19, 2010
So all this rage against the "rich" dissipates when the rich are actually named from top to bottom? Sounds like populist mob mentality.
curunirAug 19, 2010
Every single thing I've seen about those charities looks like exploitation and helping provide markets for his own corporations goods. Some of the work his charities do is actually causing more harm than good.
kingmanicAug 19, 2010
Both donate to both parties. Both have already are in the process of donating vast sums to charity.
louiszwuAug 19, 2010
I just knew some idiot would go in that direction. Trust me, it's not all about you and your failed ideology.
vdoogsAug 19, 2010
@sangjmoon
Your comment is almost as dumb as this post from your blog:
http://sangjmoon.blogspot.com/2008/08/choosing-palin-shows-balls.html
Almost. You were SO CLOSE!
I know... You can only aspire to once again reaching that pinnacle of ineptitude. Good try though.
hotshotveggieAug 19, 2010
Why aren't we burning Bill Gates and Warren Buffet in virtual effigy? Maybe because they have donated the majority of their wealth to charity, and have convinced 38 other billionares to do so, bringing about a quarter of a trillion dollars to those who need it most.
*source
http://www.france24.com/en/20100804-us-billionaires-plegde-massive-donations-charity-warren-buffet-bill%20gates
h8f8kesAug 20, 2010
Right now, or when they are done with it?
hotshotveggieAug 20, 2010
Right now. It's been on digg and other news sites for a couple weeks
redcolumbineAug 19, 2010
Not surprising. When you're living precariously close to bankruptcy and homelessness, it's always "there but for the grace of God (or luck, or my parents) go I," and you empathize and chip in.
ceeayyAug 19, 2010
Money won't buy you happiness, but you are very likely to be unhappy if you don't have money.
Money won't buy you happiness, but it likely makes life that much more comfortable.
Money won't buy you happiness, but it makes happiness that much more likely.
Money won't buy you happiness, but it will buy you things that are likely to make you happy... like a real education and good food.
However, happiness is really a matter of our perception of reality. If you think you need money to be happy you are almost guaranteed to be unhappy without it.
BTW, people are generous for selfish reasons, always. Show me someone who gives away money because it makes them feel bad... People will always do what works for them on some level, even though the motivation may not be readily apparent. We don't all want the same thing so an experiment like this will always be flawed. It doesn't take into account anything more than income level and status. People are much more complex.
needcoffeeAug 19, 2010
I've overdrafted my bank account once just to get money to lend to a friend. Didn't feel good about it, but knew it was the right thing to do in a pinch to help someone else out since it benefited him more than it hurt me.
ceeayyAug 19, 2010
NeedCoffee
Actually, you did it for a friend and it felt good to help a friend. It may have hurt you financially, but it fit into your view of what was right. In other words, you would have felt bad to go against your sense of what is right. It felt good to help a friend and it felt good to follow your belief system.
needcoffeeAug 19, 2010
Well said good sir. See your point.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
People aren't "always" generous for selfish reasons ... just most of the time
ceeayyAug 19, 2010
Well I can't see it not being always, however, I am not always right. Just because I can't see it doesn't make me right or you wrong.
I say all of that to say... I still disagree with you, but maybe I'm wrong. I don't think so, but maybe.
radicalereptorAug 19, 2010
Acquiring such obscene amounts of money requires certain behavior. Yes, high income levels help, but if you spend or donate as fast as you make it, you acquire nothing. They're just continuing the financial behavior that got them to their position in the first place.
It's just math.
notselfawareAug 19, 2010
No Jewish jokes? Fine.
mcbrockAug 19, 2010
Would love to see the source data, but not willing to spend $11 to purchase the complete article. Curious as to exactly how they are defining socioeconomic status. They mention looking at individuals and households, but you generally can not put the two together cleanly. Typically, more members in a household = more members working = higher household income (i.e. working, married couples may have higher than average household incomes, but their individual incomes could be below average). Also, are they looking at consumption or just income, and is the income gross income or after tax income? Is it only full-time income or are part-time workers included? Does it include government aid? In this country, it is possible to have an income below the poverty line, but have consumption that is double your income.
Not saying any of this is good or bad, but there is not enough info in the article to draw a true conclusion.
chrizzly89Aug 19, 2010
Selfish people have it easier to become rich. It needs selfishness to become rich.
That's why a lot of rich people are selfish. But then there is people like Buffett and Gates who are more than generous. It all depends how they got rich too.
Poor people obviously feel envy about people having no money problems and this is where the bad blood comes from a lot of times.
But they are instances when rich people ARE assh**es and not few.
Im just not a fan of generalizing.
People complain about the behaviors of rich people. Those behaviors obviously make them rich and if poor people knew how to behave like this and were morally willing to they could be rich too.
And there is a difference between wealthy and rich. You want to be wealthy not just rich.
The world is unfortunately unfair but I still believe that I can be successful if I put enough energy into it. I can barely pay for college now but Im determined to use this opportunity to learn and become wealthy one day.
advengerAug 19, 2010
"This planet has — or rather had — a problem, which was this: most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much all of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movement of small green pieces of paper, which was odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy"
~The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams
needcoffeeAug 19, 2010
Article summary: Ignorance is Bliss.
jayskullsAug 19, 2010
I'd rather be a soul-less rich bastard.
skinturtleAug 19, 2010
That's because we're still in touch with reality.
bladzalotAug 19, 2010
I would gladly take a rich wallet over a rich heart...just sayin'...
generalobviousAug 19, 2010
*yawn*
This is just BS that poor people use to try and make themselves happy.
If you never have to worry about bills, trust me, you'll be happy in your f**king heart, and you know it. So stop with this "money can't buy happiness" crap.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
RTFA
snoogsAug 19, 2010
For every new-age transcendental mind out there, there are three CEO's looking to pinch every dollar out of his/her pocket.
/buy my book
biggydiggsAug 19, 2010
Funny....the link to the national survey doesn't go to a survey at all. I smell BS.
I'm happy the world isn't economically equal. I need losers to flip my burgers, pick up my garbage, and wax my johnson.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
louiszwuAug 19, 2010
Becoming rich on your own (rather than being born into it) takes hard work. Your "I need losers to..." comment pretty much precludes that for you.
Sorry, loser.
biggydiggsAug 19, 2010
Work is for losers. How much do I have to pay to shut you up so you can get back to flipping burgers or jerking off horses at a stud farm or whatever other menial task you perform on a daily basis?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
fingerbakerAug 20, 2010
@biggydiggs. You are a giant douche. Please f**k off and die.
rickthebrickAug 19, 2010
A rich person will have to exercise more than a poor one since the poor one will get some exercise through their work. One's body is their most valuable possession and the rich must exercise it as much as the poor. The second most valuable possession is one's mate. When a rich person marries another rich person than there is no dependency on one another. They can both make it on their own and have a huge amount of other people who would do a lot to be their mate. If a rich person marries a poor person than they will feel superior to that person and feel they can get away with more because they will again have a lot more people who would do a lot to be their mate. They will also worry that the poor person married them only because of their wealth. I am 61 years of age and every year that goes by I envy the rich less since even if I was rich now I would have a year less to enjoy than I did last year. A person who gets 10 million dollars a day before they die has not gotten anything for their self. I like the challenge of trying to stretch a dollar. I can save money and I have relatives that are always of need of money so I am always lending money to them. Most of which I will never see again. I am by no means a rich person. I have never earned more than $50,000 in a year but I always spend within my means.
phucktardedAug 19, 2010
Damn it, I can't buy a jetski with heart.
Jetski > Heart
ancient53Aug 19, 2010
The poor are stupid just like the study.
tonkhoiAug 19, 2010
I wanna be a billionaire so fricking bad,
buy all of the things I never had
Uh, I wanna be on the cover of Forbes magazine
Smiling next to Oprah and the Queen
fall0ut17Aug 19, 2010
Money can't buy you happiness. But it can buy you a really big yacht.
vidorianAug 19, 2010
They say money doesn't buy happiness. They forget to add it's pretty damn hard to stay happy with no money.
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
"The most fundamental fact about the ideas of the political left is that they do not work. Therefore we should not be surprised to find the left concentrated in institutions where ideas do not have to work in order to survive."
-- Thomas Sowell
ironhideAug 19, 2010
"Hey their ideas don't work because I said so"
--Thomas Sowell
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
Actually they don't work because they're largely not based on reality. Here's another quote from Dr. Sowell that illustrates it in a bit more depth. Enjoy:
"I first became aware of the law of gravity as a small child when I pedalled by tricycle off the porch and crashed into the yard. Gravity was of course operating all along, whether I was aware of it or not. Economics is a lot like that. Many people who are completely unaware of economics sometimes discover it the same way I discovered gravity, through some personal or national crash. Liberals especially tend to think up all sorts of good things we want — a "living wage," "affordable housing," "universal health care," and an ever-expanding wish-list of things that everyone should receive as "rights" — with little or no awareness of the economic repercussions of turning that wish list into laws."
ironhideAug 19, 2010
Oh golly, a "living wage" - how terrible that people might actually be able to survive.
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
So I guess if you don't believe that government is the best way to ensure affordable housing then you automatically want people to be destitute? Am I getting that right? That demonization lends itself to yet another Sowell gem:
"Liberals seem to assume that, if you don't believe in their particular political solutions, then you don't really care about the people that they claim to want to help."
rthakidnAug 19, 2010
I, like my parents, am able to breed. Now give me some money. /s
ironhideAug 19, 2010
AHM - that quote could be applied to any political viewpoint.
One only has to look at a time before unions and government regulation regarding wages to see how much the free-market cares.
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
I don't think the quote can be applied to any political viewpoint- at least not to the same degree. Because we conservatives tend to think that people do a better job solving many social problems than government can, we're constantly accused of being heartless and uncaring. Case in point is your comment about Dr. Sowell, saying that he'd prefer that the poor live in tent cities.
And of course the free market doesn't "care." It is, after all, just a collection of businesses which exist to make profits. But by doing so, it's people who benefit. The government doesn't "care" either, but the difference is that it exists- it can ONLY exist- by the very profits that the free market creates. It's the goose that gives government the golden egg. And although it is true that regulations and even unions are necessary and have benefited workers, there's also a tipping point in which they kill or at least wound that golden egg. That's why it's prudent to heed that "awareness of the economic repercussions of turning that wish list into laws."
inajeepAug 19, 2010
Talk about a leading statement. It is not fundamental nor a fact. Sounds like Mr Sowell doesn't like schools that he has used quite heavily.
atomheartmotherAug 19, 2010
I don't read it that way at all. Schools are not by nature "left," but who could argue that many ideas taught there have to "work" in order to survive?
vegetablelambAug 19, 2010
"Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope."—Freewheelin' Franklin
Closed AccountAug 19, 2010
Freewheelin' Franklin must have been on dope when he wrote that. Where in the hell does he think he is going to get that dope with out no money?
waiting2awakeAug 20, 2010
grow it
tman84Aug 19, 2010
I love UC Berkeley, it's like Fantasyland. They've obviously never been to Camden, NJ.
Actually I applaud this farce of a study. It proves Socialism would fail, because if everyone just took money without actually working, they would become evil like the people who have money, so stay happy and poor you dirty hippies.
torisutanAug 19, 2010
I would like to point out that the study, while flawed insofar as they did not account for preconceived notions of monetary value among individuals (so rich people wouldn't think a poor person would benefit from a $10 because they themselves wouldn't benefit from it), was actually correct in its conclusion.
Rich people give themselves more money. I'll explain: Rich people create all the jobs in America. That's just how it is. If you own a business you get the most pay, and you control how much your employees get. Deny that and you're the one in a fantasy land.
Now, rich people, being rich, have obviously done something to become rich. Clearly, looking at executive vs average worker pay over the past century, what they've done is increase their pay at the expense of their employees. In so doing, and because of the financial invention of interest, they also devalued the dollar, which led to higher prices on goods. So now poor people not only earn less, they can afford less.
Socialism would not fail. All Socialism does is take capitalism and put some rules on it to prevent greed from spiraling out of control. Capitalism is all fine and good, but you need to accept the fact that is motivated by greed and nothing else. If you can be honest and admit that greed is what makes capitalism work, then great! But don't kid yourself, Capitalism will NEVER result in decent lifestyles for everyone. In comes Socialism, which is identical to capitalism with one small change: everyone gets paid based on what they actually contribute to society, or everyone gets paid equally. Take your pick, it's better than what we have now.
Do you think CEO's work harder than Mexican Gardeners? Or farmers? How about miners? Do you think having a person tell a company that he needs a golden parachute of $65 million dollars while he makes risky business decisions that invariably result in the company becoming insolvent is more valuable to America than a person who risks his life to get iron and steel out of the earth, providing raw materials for us to produce actual goods with?
If so, then great! Capitalism is for you! CEO's are more important and clearly irreplaceable so they get paid more!
However, if you live in the real world like I do, then you understand that every job makes this economy function. Imagine if your garbage collector stopped coming. What would you do? Rather than pay the $20 monthly fee for them to collect your garbage, would you pay $40 for gas to transport the trash yourself to the dump? What if there was no dump? What would you do then? Pay to have one built?
What about your car? If you ever need maintenance on it, do you go to a mechanic, or do you go to a CEO? Clearly you go to a mechanic, because his job is actually valuable in our society.
Every single job is necessary and equally important to the health of our society and our economy, thus every single job should get around the same pay. That's all socialism is. Sure, if you work harder than someone else, then you should get more money than them, but if you spend all your time golfing and cruising around on jets? No. Sorry. You get minimum wage because you clearly aren't willing to contribute anything useful to the world.
vegetablelambAug 19, 2010
what exactly does this have to do with Socialism?
inajeepAug 19, 2010
Nice aquarium there. They have a new exhibit where you can walk amongst the rays.