7 ms·
all the benefits delivered to mankind by the efforts of the innovators hasn't stopped the demonization of the rich. giving away what they've been paid to deliv
by stretchwithme 16y ago
all the benefits delivered to mankind by the efforts of the innovators hasn't stopped the demonization of the rich. giving away what they've been paid to deliver those benefits probably won't either.
- adambyrtek 16y agoProbably because "rich" and "innovators" isn't really the same thing, and there was even less overlap in the past.
- stretchwithme 16y agowell, I prefer people be demonized for their crimes, not for what they have.
- redrobot5050 16y ago"Ten men in our country could buy the whole world and ten million can't buy enough to eat." --Will Rogers People demonize the wealthy because they see people acting selfishly and it creating, or at least ignoring, the basic injustices of the world. If I had fallen down, would you not ask me if I was okay? Would you not offer to help me up? Transforming Facebook from a website to a profitable business is a great business accomplishment. Transforming the wealth acquired in such an endeavor into educations, scholarships, and other decency-of-life improvements is simply a great accomplishment.
- stretchwithme 16y agofortunately, most wealth is invested in ventures that hire people. The economic disasters that impoverish so many are not caused by the rich who've worked to create their wealth but by those who mismanage economies and abuse others to benefit themselves and their friends. These thieves are rich to be sure, but a distinction should be made between the two groups.
- bertil 16y agoRich are not demonized. People who use their wealth to feel superior and annoy others, who are wealthy enough to set up tax-evasion scheme, who behave as if they can pay to be above the law are demonized.
- nhangen 16y agoI disagree. The rich are often demonized, at least to the extent that the non-rich feel the rich have an obligation to give their wealth away in order to subsidize the less fortunate. Those that don't, like Gates in his early career, were often treated with disdain.
- bertil 16y agoIf I recall correctly, Gates was disdained first, when he wasn't so rich, and because he went against the doxa of the time that was that code was a fun thing to do (see Dan Ariely's work on introducing commercial elements in social pursuits) ; most actually had no idea what he wanted to do, and those who did knew he sold an OS that he didn't write himself. Now that his work is behind him and he is left with just his fortune, his popularity seems to have raised.
- dpatru 16y agoAs long as wealth is earned without coercion by providing goods and services to others, why should you care if someone is using their wealth to "feel superior"? What moral justification is there to take away (through taxes or otherwise) the wealth of someone who has earned it through voluntary exchange? If you choose to work harder than me in providing things of value to others and you grow richer than me as a result, why should I (or a democratic government) then have a claim on your wealth?
- stretchwithme 16y agoabsolutely. you have the right to the work of your own hands and mind. Your rights don't evaporate just because of a show of hands.