2 ms·

By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Every society has some measure for who deserves more and who deserves less. The Nazis determined it

By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Every society has some measure for who deserves more and who deserves less. The Nazis determined it by ethnicity. Other societies determined it by whether you were born into noble families. Our society today determines it by wealth, which in the end is just a proxy for ancestry and luck. A truly fair system would allocate resources only based on factors entirely under your own control. It's not fair if you're punished for being born into the wrong family. It follows that using wealth as a measure is definitely a bad choice.

jmye 3y ago
Boiling wealth down to solely luck or family is a wild leap, and I’m not sure how you’d support it with actual evidence. Counter examples are trivial. I’m also still not clear why money is a bad tool for acquiring luxury resources. We’re not talking about necessary food and shelter, we’re talking about a high end restaurant. Is there something wrong with saving money for things I want? Why should I have to enter a lottery for everything? Maybe I end up with a trip to Disney World, which I don’t want, instead of a nice date night with my wife, which I do want. Is there some reason you think that’s a more desirable situation or more fair? It feels like a weird way to try to be equitable for things that will never, ever be equitable, and a strange, unsupportable justification for it.
- kuschku 3y ago
  You may have misunderstood me — I didn't say luck or family is the only source of wealth. But in a just world, luck or family should have as little influence on your allocation of resources as possible. Wealth amassed through working and saving your wage is a just and fair system in my opinion. It's still biased as not all wages are fairly negotiated, but it's the most fair solution today. My vision for the world is a socially democratic one — everyone is guaranteed a basic level of survival, similar in terms of housing, medical care and food access to what you'd get from a university dorm and cafeteria. Beyond that, people can gain wealth from their own work and save it up. If you'd rather eat at a cheap restaurant every week, or a michelin star restaurant every few years, should be up to you. But your wealth and your access to resources should come from your own work and not the luck of being born into the right family, the right ethnicity, the right country, or the right caste.
popcalc 3y ago
>It follows that using wealth as a measure [for deserving] is definitely a bad choice. It's not a choice. Would you rather it be wealth or violence? As civilizations mature, the power that happens to be encapsulated in a tribal (read gang) leader's threat of physical violence and banishment transmogrifies into debt obligations once a strong civil law foundation is in place. >By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Who decides who deserves what? Let me know and we'll start lobbying next Monday ;) “Don't you understand that it's a question of power, and money means power. It's as simple as that.” - John Deuss

jmye 3y ago

Boiling wealth down to solely luck or family is a wild leap, and I’m not sure how you’d support it with actual evidence. Counter examples are trivial. I’m also still not clear why money is a bad tool for acquiring luxury resources. We’re not talking about necessary food and shelter, we’re talking about a high end restaurant. Is there something wrong with saving money for things I want? Why should I have to enter a lottery for everything? Maybe I end up with a trip to Disney World, which I don’t want, instead of a nice date night with my wife, which I do want. Is there some reason you think that’s a more desirable situation or more fair? It feels like a weird way to try to be equitable for things that will never, ever be equitable, and a strange, unsupportable justification for it.

kuschku 3y ago
You may have misunderstood me — I didn't say luck or family is the only source of wealth. But in a just world, luck or family should have as little influence on your allocation of resources as possible. Wealth amassed through working and saving your wage is a just and fair system in my opinion. It's still biased as not all wages are fairly negotiated, but it's the most fair solution today. My vision for the world is a socially democratic one — everyone is guaranteed a basic level of survival, similar in terms of housing, medical care and food access to what you'd get from a university dorm and cafeteria. Beyond that, people can gain wealth from their own work and save it up. If you'd rather eat at a cheap restaurant every week, or a michelin star restaurant every few years, should be up to you. But your wealth and your access to resources should come from your own work and not the luck of being born into the right family, the right ethnicity, the right country, or the right caste.

popcalc 3y ago

>It follows that using wealth as a measure [for deserving] is definitely a bad choice. It's not a choice. Would you rather it be wealth or violence? As civilizations mature, the power that happens to be encapsulated in a tribal (read gang) leader's threat of physical violence and banishment transmogrifies into debt obligations once a strong civil law foundation is in place. >By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Who decides who deserves what? Let me know and we'll start lobbying next Monday ;) “Don't you understand that it's a question of power, and money means power. It's as simple as that.” - John Deuss