3 ms·
The way you phrase it is as if one of those things follows from the other, but it doesn't. Would you say "You don't have to be religious to recognize that peop
by kybernetikos 11y ago
The way you phrase it is as if one of those things follows from the other, but it doesn't.
Would you say "You don't have to be religious to recognize that people want ice cream, thus working towards giving them ice cream is a worthy goal"?
Just because other people want something doesn't mean that you value giving it to them, without some other unstated belief.
- kuschku 11y agoBut it would make them happy? And if it costs me less than it brings them, sure, I’d do it. That’s like the whole point why social nations in Europe can exist. Because everyone is willing to help, sometimes even at their own cost.
- MichaelGG 11y ago>And if it costs me less than it brings them, sure, I’d do it. This can't be true (or did you just mean for ice cream, where the cost is negligible?). Some people are going to have a terrible life, and for something like 20% of your salary, you could dramatically improve it. I doubt there is a way to measure the impact where giving, say, half of disposable income directly to some poor folks isn't a net positive.
- kuschku 11y agoWell, that's one of the parts of social democracies, where you end up spending around half of your salary on income taxes.