Page 8 of 8
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:21 pm
by henry quirk
Bluntly...
I'm not changing the way I conduct myself in-forum...not my content or my methods of transmitting content.
If my content or methods are irksome, feel free to ignore me.
'nuff said.
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:09 pm
by TSBU
henry quirk wrote:Bluntly...
I'm not changing the way I conduct myself in-forum...not my content or my methods of transmitting content.
If my content or methods are irksome, feel free to ignore me.
'nuff said.
I'm going to do the same till someone ask me to stop. No titles XD
no one will ask you to stop cuz no one cares
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:11 pm
by henry quirk
Welcome to the Dark Side.
Re: How much wealth is it ethical to have when the person next to you does not even have enough to eat?
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 5:35 am
by osgart
it is in the best interests of society to keep people off the street. Perhaps require them to do mandatory labor would be good.
As far as money goes it only represents what it must. Perhaps we need to attach a moral value to money as well and distribute survival to the masses who can't earn it. Create a survival system for the bottom wrung of life. in the system require labor or some form of work.
Re: How much wealth is it ethical to have when the person next to you does not even have enough to eat?
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:50 am
by Belinda
We have to be practical. There is n o way that this world will be fair in distribution of wealth. The ethics that underlie the distribution of wealth are a continuum. I am a socialist not a communist which means that I endorse the application of restraints upon uneven distribution such as applies right now under unrestrained capitalism. However an elite class is always going to exist in any society so communism is impossible in this relative world.
There exist at least in theory specific restraints upon excessive accumulation of wealth by individuals, restraints which benefit the poorer people and which my conscience support. I therefore vote for a political party which promotes ethics that underlie social mobility.
The ethics of people who endorse grossly uneven distribution of wealth are bad ethics.
Re: How much wealth is it ethical to have when the person next to you does not even have enough to eat?
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:45 am
by osgart
the wealthy seem to control the money supply and the economic system they have created is a beast that governs all. money doesn't respond to morals. it responds to a hierarchy of wealth and gain. America is an oligarchy first and foremost and the kings and queens of it are many but fewer. everything they spend comes back to them.
the wealthy own labor and resource and their grip is tight.
theirs no give nor govern in money. So the poor will always have to defy the odds.
to educate yourself you must pay dearly. And so many parents sacrifice themselves for their offspring.
I suppose if democracy true reigned, money would be an entirely different animal.
you will never see a productive government, only gridlock and special interest, and the war of the wealthy over labor and resource ownership.