3 ms·
Since you seem interested in chatting, I left a response over on a parallel thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29413523 https://news.ycombinator.com/i
by sillysaurusx 5y ago
Since you seem interested in chatting, I left a response over on a parallel thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29413523 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29413523
In a society where some people get more than others, it's hard to imagine that there are zero poor people. Therefore it's up to the rich to be generous enough to help them. It doesn't even cost us that much -- small acts of charity can ahve a huge impact.
- onion2k 5y agoit's hard to imagine that there are zero poor people Of course, but that's OK. "Poor" is a relative term that we measure against "rich". It's OK to be poor. I don't believe the rich should give to the poor simply to equalize how much wealth each person has. The concept of rich people is fine. One day I'd like to be one. Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk could marry and form the world's first half-a-trillion-dollars power couple for all I care. The issue is people having that much money while at the same time people on their doorstep are starving, homeless, and dying because they have to ration their medicine. The fact that corporations and the elite refuse to pay taxes means the structural issues in society aren't being addressed (taxation is part of the issue; how the government spends what they raise in taxes is the other half.) We could live in a society where no one is homeless, everyone has enough food and warmth, and everyone gets a good education and hospital treatment if they need it, and everyone would be able to work to buy the best Ferrari or to travel or to make art. 21st century human society is capable of that. We choose not to.