Well, I just want to say that much of what has been said thus far has been stupendous. What bothers me is this. We all recognize that jealousy is ridiculous and stupid. It stems from a warped philosophy (egalitarianism) that says that all men should be equal. (worthy of another thread entirely) Basically, what I'm seeing is that people here are ascribing to the philosophy that is incompatible with capitalism. Understand this: I earn my money. I sweat, I yearn, I think. My money is the product of my philosophy of life, and my willingness and desire to live by supporting myself. Others do not share this desire. Many, especially in this culture, find it much more profitable to leech off of others. This they accomplish in a number of ways which are not necessarily relevant here. These individuals think that others are obligated to support them. That those who have should help the have nots. This ideology stems from a warped understanding of the universe which is completely incompatible with existence. I understand that I exist from a never-ending process of self-sustaining action: WORK. Those who do not understand this spend their entire lives trying to obtain their sustenance from sources outside of their control: others. I would rather die than accept a philosophy that states that I am to work for another man's existence. Similarly, I will be damned if I feel one bit of remorse for doing whatever I desire with the product of my time, effort, sweat, tears, work. Consequently, I refuse to think that I am obligated to help others by being a philanthropist. This is not to say that philanthropy is out of the question. However, for the most part, those, like me, who follow my aforementioned values and to whom I would be most inclined to give, would not accept charity. This is basically an incredibly long way of stating that I accept ALL of the guilt (responsibility) for my success which others try to place on me, and I refuse to share it with anyone else.
Socialism - not compatible with capitalism - Yes - probably a topic for another thread. It has really taken hold and strangled so much of European enterprise in the last 80-100 years, and seems to be creeping into the US as well. In Europe, (some countries more than others) anyone that works very hard and achieves much in financial terms has the larger slice of their earnings taken away from them one way or another. Income Tax at 40% National Insurance at 10% Capital Gains Tax at 40% That's on the money coming in. Then when you go to spend some of it, you pay VAT at 17 1/2%. Many Items have additional taxes levied on them in addition to VAT, but are hidden way up the line like import duty, additional duty on fuel, luxury goods mostly have additional duties on them. Then there are the local taxes that are just more tax dressed up differently. You buy a house - you pay tax to buy it. You buy a car, it has 3 different types of taxes on it. If you are employed in a job, your empoyer has to pay tax for employing you!!!!! - To me that is total madness... This is socialism, where the wealth is taken away from enterprising, hard working people, and re-distrubuted to others who are not necessarily in that category. Pays for an education system that is in a desperate state and a disgrace. A transport system that is positively lethal and should carry a government health warning, a health service that fails its patients miserably. In a more socialist society, it is not Ok in the eyes of most people to do well. It is not Ok to accumulate wealth. It is not OK to have a good lifestyle. Sure everyone dreams of it, but it's only for people on television. That's OK - That's illusion, That's not real, That is the exception not the rule. The person next door doesn't get successful. If you have a great idea, people would rather drag you back down than give you a boost up. That way you don't upset their comfort Zone that everyone has had pummelled into them by the socialist system. OK. I'm not about to say everyone for themselves and descend to totally dog eat dog, but I think things in Europe are way out of hand and seeing some of it creep slowly but surely into the US bothers me too. Natalie
Andrew Carnegie was not a socialist. Socialism is INvoluntary. Philanthropy is voluntary. The questions are this: is the market the only thing worth investing in? Are you the only thing worth investing in? I can only answer for myself and I say that the poor, the sick, the uneducated and the less fortunate are all worth investing in. I believe that I stand on the shoulders of others who sacrificed for me and I will try to do the same for them. That's not socialism.
You are quite right. - That is not Socialism as you describe it - just as long as you have the choice that you are doing that. However, when you are paying taxes that total more than 70% of your income (probably more like over 80% if truth be known), and paying taxes on your wealth (if you manage to accumulate any with the high taxes on your income), have no choice in whether you pay them or not, or at what level you pay them, (more to the point they are taken from you) have no influence over the usage, have no control over the methed or motive, this is not voluntary and the argument ceases to hold water. It is no longer you who are doing this. You are being forced to do this in ways and at levels you have not decided. That *is* socialism and sadly a very accurate portrait of how Europe works. No wonder Europe is in such a financial mess... Natalie
I think that both of you missed my point... perhaps I could have been a bit more clear. As successful traders we have a specific philosophy that enables us to do well. We take personal responsibility for our own actions, and we are independent and self-perpetuating. What I find repulsive is those who, after succeeding with this nature, go back and try to justify themselves in the eyes of their piers who operate under an antagonistic philosophy. I do not believe that men should get anything that they haven't earned and consequently deserve. I have no responsibilities to others. I work for my own existence and fulfillment. I could give my money away to those who don't deserve it, but then my life is contradictory and lacks consistency. Additionally, anyone, who realizes that man must earn what he obtains would never accept philanthropy as it would be insulting. Yes, this is capitalism. Yes, one of capitalism's antagonists is Socialism. It, however, goes much deeper. I'm attacking those who hold the contradictory philosophy that Socialism is noble, but somehow impractical. Socialism and altruism are not noble. Many on this thread sound as if they are still trying to "fit in" amonst their piers. Instead of realizing that the reason that they don't fit in is because their friends hold an entirely different philosophy.
What do you think about inheritance? If Bill Gates dies and he only has one child, should the child get it? If not, what happens to it? I hate how people are just plain lucky, too, but what if Bill Gates lived his life with the goal of being able to provide for his offspring in a great way? PP
I understood your point perfectly but thank you for further expansion of it and apologies for any misunderstanding. Your point did however imediately lead me to thinking of the system of forcing those like us to help others of whom you have spoken, and then give it a label and description, (which is unfortunately a description of the society in which I live). My second response was to re-inforce the difference in socialism vs. choice. Personally - I'm pro choice, which after all is one of the reasons why I work so hard - So I have choices instead of no choice. Yes - we are a different breed to 99% of the population. Natalie
classic objectivism, well said. however, i do not believe there is anything wrong with seeing someone in need and helping that person; if one does it with their own free will. helping another becomes WRONG when you are forced to do it. as far as fitting in goes, FORGET IT ! once you get that million plus house and ferrari--- kiss most of your so called friends good bye. all the best my friend, surfer