4 ms·

So we should all be poor together. Then there will be less murders, bullying and other social ills. Sounds like an ideological view but tell me I’m wrong

jjulius 3y ago
>... but tell me I'm wrong. It genuinely feels like you know you're assuming the worst when the article doesn't go that far.
- quintes 3y ago
  “ the world can no longer afford two things: first, the costs of economic inequality; and second, the rich” “ The evidence gathered by social epidemiologists, including us, shows that large differences in income are a powerful social stressor that is increasingly rendering societies dysfunctional” “ Even affluent people would enjoy a better quality of life if they lived in a country with a more equal distribution of wealth” “ Greater equality will reduce unhealthy and excess consumption, and will increase the solidarity and cohesion that are needed to make societies more adaptable in the face of climate and other emergencies” It does go that far
  - IanCal 3y ago
    That absolutely doesn't say everyone should be poor.
  - jjulius 3y ago
    No it does not. Your biases want it to.
nonrandomstring 3y ago
It says we should all be rich together. Which would happen if we all loved each other a bit more.
- Xeyz0r 3y ago
  Kindness and love can make a world a better place
  - snapplebobapple 3y ago
    it can make it a much worse place too. It's why we can find versions of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" dating back to the book of Sirach in the second century BC (it was probably being said before then, that's just he first written record of a similar proverb).
    - nonrandomstring 3y ago
      > Sirach in the second century BC Interesting reference, good one! Yes, the phrases "For your own good" or "Making the world a better place" often precede tyranny and carnage, Lots of modern technology that is ruinous to human life is built by people who deeply, sincerely believe they're "bringing value and progress" to the world. I never doubt their heartfelt intentions. That's what makes it a genuine tragedy. So, as I age, I revert to more fundamental thoughts about love rather than merely being "less wrong" or "effectively altruistic" or "making the world better". Whose world?

jjulius 3y ago

>... but tell me I'm wrong. It genuinely feels like you know you're assuming the worst when the article doesn't go that far.

quintes 3y ago
“ the world can no longer afford two things: first, the costs of economic inequality; and second, the rich” “ The evidence gathered by social epidemiologists, including us, shows that large differences in income are a powerful social stressor that is increasingly rendering societies dysfunctional” “ Even affluent people would enjoy a better quality of life if they lived in a country with a more equal distribution of wealth” “ Greater equality will reduce unhealthy and excess consumption, and will increase the solidarity and cohesion that are needed to make societies more adaptable in the face of climate and other emergencies” It does go that far
- IanCal 3y ago
  That absolutely doesn't say everyone should be poor.
- jjulius 3y ago
  No it does not. Your biases want it to.

nonrandomstring 3y ago

It says we should all be rich together. Which would happen if we all loved each other a bit more.

Xeyz0r 3y ago
Kindness and love can make a world a better place
- snapplebobapple 3y ago
  it can make it a much worse place too. It's why we can find versions of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" dating back to the book of Sirach in the second century BC (it was probably being said before then, that's just he first written record of a similar proverb).
  - nonrandomstring 3y ago
    > Sirach in the second century BC Interesting reference, good one! Yes, the phrases "For your own good" or "Making the world a better place" often precede tyranny and carnage, Lots of modern technology that is ruinous to human life is built by people who deeply, sincerely believe they're "bringing value and progress" to the world. I never doubt their heartfelt intentions. That's what makes it a genuine tragedy. So, as I age, I revert to more fundamental thoughts about love rather than merely being "less wrong" or "effectively altruistic" or "making the world better". Whose world?