i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
No you don't 'just think' anything. You assert in the name of god almighty that rich people who don't follow your edicts will burn in Hell for eternity.
Cofty, I don't assert that. I just draw your attention to the relevant scripture. If you don't like it, tough. That is what is written, there.
Best wishes, 2RM
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Vidiot: Classic.
Jesus came to save all us sinners from the inevitable consequences of our sin. And he loved us sinners enough to render up His life to that end. I don't find that to be an unworthy mission, unworthily pursued.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
The people responsible for the poor are:
1. poor people themselves
I assure you, LoveUniHateExams, that though there may be some poor people who are responsible for their own state, the vast majority of the two billion absolutely poor are that poor because of their circumstances, rather than any moral vice. They are born disadvantaged, go through life disadvantaged, and die (often enough, prematurely) disadvantaged. No one wants this for themselves and their families, and no one tolerates it if they have the slightest capacity to end their disadvantage. I just think we should help them out, right up to the point where we would become equally disadvantaged, if we gave any more.
Best wishes, 2RM
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
The "problem" your solution introduces is that nature will re-establish the disproportion pretty much immediately.
Anony Mous, indeed it might. But my hope is, by hitting the economic reset button decisively real soon now, at least absolute poverty stands a reasonable chance of being eradicated, once and for all. If that happens, why, then it will be the time for the rich to party! But not until then.
Best wishes, 2RM
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
2. By destroying resource allocation (not allocating through prices by rather some arbritrary calculation) thereby introducing the calculation problem almost overnight, wiping out the capital in all investment, as well as a massive motivational problem.
This is to misunderstand my position, as I hope the two posts above will help demonstrate. Nothing I propose will wipe out capital, just distribute it more equitably. Nothing I propose involves arbitrary calculations, just a whole load of people helping out a whole load of other people. Nothing I propose will destroy motivation, unless you are so crass as to suppose that the only motivation that matters is selfish, personal, financial gain.
Best wishes, 2RM
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Those requirements aren’t reasonable.
Nevertheless, they are the theoretical underpinning of what economists call 'a free market'.
In fact the reason markets work well is exactly because products are never identitcal, it produces competition (unless it is stamped down by government favor or regulation or barriers to entry), prevents monopolies (because of the absence of government favor, regulation, and barriers to entry), and nobody has perfect knowledge - indeed the market *counts on* imperfect knowledge. These are the exact reason why the market algorithm works so well.
So, I infer that you don't actually want a free market, at all. Just a whole load of oligopolies and monopolies, (which is what suppliers of non-identical commodities are) that will inevitably exploit their market leverage to extract wealth from the poor to deposit with the wealthy.
Note your inconsistency: you complain about a market without perfect knowledge, and yet you assume you can reallocate resources yourself.
On the contrary, I have already answered this point, earlier in the thread. I propose that each individual makes his/her own decision about where, and to who, their excess of wealth should be directed.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
1. The seventh and tenth.
Hmmm. MeanMrMustard, I presume you mean 'Thou shalt not steal' (the 8th) and 'Thou shalt not covet...' (the 10th)
So, a) I am not proposing anyone steals anything. Only a massive charitable effort, on behalf of the rich, to succour the poor. I do not see how that might be construed as 'stealing'.
and b) I am not proposing that anyone covets anything. Only that those who have more wealth than they need, donate it, directly or indirectly, to those who have less wealth than they need.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
I am late to this thread. Tough to catch up. Some questions:
1. Do you think the 10 commandments are moral? If so, how do you feel about your proposal blatently violating two of them?
2. If your dream redistribution can be shown to throw an economy into a state of chaos, resulting in horrible starvation and suffering, would you feel you still have the moral high ground?
MeanMrMustard, Thank you for taking the trouble to catch up. But you will have to humour me. 1. Which commandments would they be? 2. How might that chaos, starvation and suffering arise out of what I propose?
The free market. A real one. No minimum wage, no price fixing (setting interest rates), no massive money printing. And no theft. Minimum government to insure private property rights, and not much else.
Believe me, I am not ideologically opposed to the free-market. Indeed, I think when it's fundamental requirements are met (eg; commodities are identical and replacable; many suppliers, none large enough to fix the price; many consumers, all acting rationally with perfect knowledge of the market, mobility of capital, labour and consumers, etc) then I think it works reasonably well.
But in many markets, that is not what we have, and therefore we see this concentration of more and more of total world wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer people. And I think that is not good for the world, or for the people in it.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
Then you should be telling Him that there are poor, suffering, impoverished people on this planet of His, instead of trying to save the world yourself.
In my experience, Splash, God works through us, not instead of us. That way, we develop the necessary virtues, which He can reward.
I'm off now, for the night. Keep safe, everyone.
Best wishes, 2RM.
i am interested in the approach this forum takes to money.
apart from sex, (which i am quite relaxed about) it seems to me that wealth is the surest divider between those who are moral, and those who are not.. it seems jesus thought so, also.
luke 16:19-31 kjv describes well enough his dusty attitude to the rich who do not succour the poor.. and this world has many poor: so many, it might seem that we can do nothing about it, and twist his words; 'the poor ye shall have always with you, but me, ye shall not have always.
First provide some evidence that god exists then we can talk about his favouritism.
Cofty, there is no such objective evidence, and in my opinion, there never will be. God will not interfere with our freedom to believe, or disbelieve, as we prefer.
But really, we are straying a long way from the thread theme, which is 'Wealth, Poverty and Morality' and I do not propose beyond here to continue this tangent.
Best wishes, 2RM.
