3 ms·

The Economist (a magazine that is very pro-business) had an interesting article recently about social psychology experiments that showed that the rich are less

The Economist (a magazine that is very pro-business) had an interesting article recently about social psychology experiments that showed that the rich are less able to enjoy the day to day pleasures of life. And this effect also happens among people temporarily made relatively rich (say given $100) or even just shown pictures of money. The need of our economic system to keep people consuming creates advertising indoctrination that pulls our attention away from what really satisfies: Day to day relationships with other people and the details of our life. Excess wealth is more a matter of aggressively possessing things that other people don't have than enjoying those things for themselves. It leads to an empty narcissism that leaves the rich unsatisfied and without empathy for the victims of their greed. And frustrated and angry and in search of scapegoats.

viggity 16y ago
Oh, so it is ok to take away what someone else's earnings because you know better than they do?
- niels_olson 16y ago
  In a complex society with specialized occupations like "entrepreneur", "economist" and "congress-critter"? Yes. BTW, how's DARPAnet working for you these days?
  - viggity 16y ago
    I'm happy to pay (reasonable) taxes for needs that cannot be easily serviced by private industry. That isn't what my post was about. The post I was replying to was trying to insinuate that having "excess wealth" leads to being unhappy and therefore (in the context of the OP) it is ok to tax the rich more because it will make them happier in the end. And that is a bullshit reason for taxing someone.
CapitalistCartr 16y ago
I've known several dozen wealthy people and none of them are like that. Not one. All of them were older, and paid little attention to the 'consumer culture' that advertising promotes. Most of that advertising was through channels that target the young (under 45) crowd because they are the ones best influenced by it.

viggity 16y ago

Oh, so it is ok to take away what someone else's earnings because you know better than they do?

niels_olson 16y ago
In a complex society with specialized occupations like "entrepreneur", "economist" and "congress-critter"? Yes. BTW, how's DARPAnet working for you these days?
- viggity 16y ago
  I'm happy to pay (reasonable) taxes for needs that cannot be easily serviced by private industry. That isn't what my post was about. The post I was replying to was trying to insinuate that having "excess wealth" leads to being unhappy and therefore (in the context of the OP) it is ok to tax the rich more because it will make them happier in the end. And that is a bullshit reason for taxing someone.

CapitalistCartr 16y ago

I've known several dozen wealthy people and none of them are like that. Not one. All of them were older, and paid little attention to the 'consumer culture' that advertising promotes. Most of that advertising was through channels that target the young (under 45) crowd because they are the ones best influenced by it.