4 ms·

horribly unreadable. i really don't know where to start criticising this, but "why is there poverty?" - really?

empath75 2y ago
If you didn't read it why are you commenting on it? We should probably just delete this entire comment section and start over.
- zabzonk 2y ago
  i did read it, with great difficulty - that does not make it basically unreadable
  - dinkblam 2y ago
    i found it one of the most easily readable articles in a while. the author has a clear mind and good articulation.
pinkmuffinere 2y ago
The example question "Why is there poverty" is presented as an example of a childish question. In the limited criticism you provide, I think you're actually agreeing with the author.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
  Because humans were born naked onto a planet with no material wealth until they started creating it for themselves? That, by the way, is the very definition of absolute objective poverty. Is this not plainly obvious even to small children?
  - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
    Yes, exactly. This is one of the points of the article -- it isn't interesting to ask "Why is there poverty?" A more interesting question would be like "How does _anyone_ escape poverty?"
    - NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
      The first step in escaping poverty is to abandon the attitude that social equity and wealth equality are wholesome ideas. If you fail to do this, then you have no need of escaping poverty, because everyone has the same amount of wealth and it's all perfectly equitable.
      - deadbolt 2y ago
        That doesn't track at all, as it completely ignores the fact people can work together to raise their wealth.
        NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
        But why raise it when everyone has the same amount of wealth (zero)? You've achieved everything you ever set out to achieve.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    No, actually, it’s not particularly obvious to a small child that grows up in a wealthy country. That’s the point.
  - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
    No, it isn't, because for most of pre-history poverty didn't exist as a concept. It barely existed as a concept in early history. Poverty in this culture isn't just defined as a lack, but as an unjust experience of relative lack. And it's loaded with unspoken value judgements - like the common belief that people in poverty shouldn't have an expensive phone, because that's somehow unfair on everyone else. Why this idea of poverty exists as a concept now, when previously it didn't, is a much more interesting question - and one this piece gets nowhere near addressing, never mind answering. So this is a very superficial article. You can't ask why people believe true things if you're just going to assume - as the author says no one should, and then does himself - that everyone somehow magically agrees about which truths should be questioned.

If you didn't read it why are you commenting on it? We should probably just delete this entire comment section and start over.

zabzonk 2y ago
i did read it, with great difficulty - that does not make it basically unreadable
- dinkblam 2y ago
  i found it one of the most easily readable articles in a while. the author has a clear mind and good articulation.

pinkmuffinere 2y ago

The example question "Why is there poverty" is presented as an example of a childish question. In the limited criticism you provide, I think you're actually agreeing with the author.

NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
Because humans were born naked onto a planet with no material wealth until they started creating it for themselves? That, by the way, is the very definition of absolute objective poverty. Is this not plainly obvious even to small children?
- pinkmuffinere 2y ago
  Yes, exactly. This is one of the points of the article -- it isn't interesting to ask "Why is there poverty?" A more interesting question would be like "How does _anyone_ escape poverty?"
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
    The first step in escaping poverty is to abandon the attitude that social equity and wealth equality are wholesome ideas. If you fail to do this, then you have no need of escaping poverty, because everyone has the same amount of wealth and it's all perfectly equitable.
    - deadbolt 2y ago
      That doesn't track at all, as it completely ignores the fact people can work together to raise their wealth.
      - NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
        But why raise it when everyone has the same amount of wealth (zero)? You've achieved everything you ever set out to achieve.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  No, actually, it’s not particularly obvious to a small child that grows up in a wealthy country. That’s the point.
- TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
  No, it isn't, because for most of pre-history poverty didn't exist as a concept. It barely existed as a concept in early history. Poverty in this culture isn't just defined as a lack, but as an unjust experience of relative lack. And it's loaded with unspoken value judgements - like the common belief that people in poverty shouldn't have an expensive phone, because that's somehow unfair on everyone else. Why this idea of poverty exists as a concept now, when previously it didn't, is a much more interesting question - and one this piece gets nowhere near addressing, never mind answering. So this is a very superficial article. You can't ask why people believe true things if you're just going to assume - as the author says no one should, and then does himself - that everyone somehow magically agrees about which truths should be questioned.