Rich People Won?t Go To The Heaven Discuss this

[anwiii 17]

Every country should have control of their own resources, and use those resources to feed their own people. It should not be used to give you or any other outsider advantages and unequal opportunity. You can deny the facts all you want, but the facts stand alone and all the rhetoric about people being about to achieve based on determination is nothing more than baseless propaganda and denial. I will leave you with a quote.
Man has always sacrificed truth to his vanity, comfort and advantage. He lives by make-believe.
~W. Somerset Maugham

wow. according to your statistics and assumtions along with truefusion's beliefs.....it's not the rich that will have a hard time getting in to heaven. now it's the whites? hahahahahaha! this conversation is getting funnier and funnier. where are you getting those statistics and where are you getting information that whites are corrupting other countries so harshly that the natives have to dig in garbage cans? i want your resources.

that's like me saying blacks will have it easy finding their way in heaven if it's true people find god in jail. because when you look at the percentage of blacks in american compared to whites and compare the percentages of whites and blacks in jail, you'll notice an imbalance. but see....again....if i were to state that, i would only be showing my own ignorance. i just used those statistics as an example of how people can be so blinded by the truth.

also, you claimed in anothe thread that you haven't even traveled out of the south or even past the borders of your own state. how much can you really possibly know first hand about things unless you believe in everything you hear or read? i have been to africa btw. they don't seem to be hurting or "poor" unless by their own choices. they have universities there and they have places where the small schools would be lucky enough to have enough pencils to go around and who live in mud huts and caverns they built themselves. your statistics may be correct. i don't know, but when i went to kenya and tansania, if those two countries are 70% white owned, it was SURELY not shown in the polulation. believe me. blacks are the majority as far as population. that was clearly shown. in fact, white people were scarce or they were hiding somewhere where i surely didn't see the abundance.

i know maybe three weeks in two countries isn't much time to know exactly what goes on, but i do know that coutnries like give GREAT credit for their gains through tourism. something you failed to mention in your statistics because your thinking is not balanced. and why is it that when i went there and would get personal with the locals, they actually claim to love whites? i know the answer to that as to why. do you? i wont answer right now only because i see it pointless to make this topic in to some sort of racial argeument about who is getting in to heaven easier. also, i am smart enough to know that problems aren't due to any ONE thing.

[deadmad7 4]

that's like me saying blacks will have it easy finding their way in heaven if it's true people find god in jail. because when you look at the percentage of blacks in american compared to whites and compare the percentages of whites and blacks in jail, you'll notice an imbalance. but see....again....if i were to state that, i would only be showing my own ignorance. i just used those statistics as an example of how people can be so blinded by the truth.

There IS an imbalance because most black are poor -- at least the ones that live in the ghettos and stuff, and they want to have some "protection" or just want have enough money to go to school -- that's why there is an imbalance... there is still a kinda "difference" between black and white people in America and you can't deny that either. I know a African-American guy who robbed a 7-11 just so he can pay his family rent -- he had 3 sisters and 2 brothers... he was caught, of course, but he says that he doesn't regret it.

also, you claimed in anothe thread that you haven't even traveled out of the south or even past the borders of your own state. how much can you really possibly know first hand about things unless you believe in everything you hear or read? i have been to africa btw. they don't seem to be hurting or "poor" unless by their own choices. they have universities there and they have places where the small schools would be lucky enough to have enough pencils to go around and who live in mud huts and caverns they built themselves. your statistics may be correct. i don't know, but when i went to kenya and tansania, if those two countries are 70% white owned, it was SURELY not shown in the polulation. believe me. blacks are the majority as far as population. that was clearly shown. in fact, white people were scarce or they were hiding somewhere where i surely didn't see the abundance.

Ya, I HATE people who characterize Africa based on what they saw on 'Blood Diamond' and 'Hotel Rwanda' other movies... it isn't even showing the GREATER part of the community -- of Africa. It focuses only the corruption and war. All African general people aren't eVil freaks... the army people aren't plagued by corruption anymore... they want a better life and better government like the citizens -- the army are the citizens.

i know maybe three weeks in two countries isn't much time to know exactly what goes on, but i do know that coutnries like give GREAT credit for their gains through tourism. something you failed to mention in your statistics because your thinking is not balanced. and why is it that when i went there and would get personal with the locals, they actually claim to love whites? i know the answer to that as to why. do you? i wont answer right now only because i see it pointless to make this topic in to some sort of racial argeument about who is getting in to heaven easier. also, i am smart enough to know that problems aren't due to any ONE thing.

True, white people and other race people have done a great deal in making Africa a better place... they don't show any of that, only how the white man robs the wealth of the black slave.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I do not agree with that. My father was so poor that he did not have electricity in his house. Now, thanks to God, he is very rich. We have houses in 2 of the best cities in the country. Have 2 cars, good computers, mobiles, appliances, etc. etc.And he is an engineer. So his way of earning it all was not bad at all.

This. You're 100% correct. Poor or rich means absolutely nothing. All it does is determine what you *start* with.

The owner of Blizzard/Activision started his business with his life savings ($400k he saved up by only getting his necessities). Now he's a hundred-millionaire. Did he start out rich? No.

The Forbes highest-paid people in the world were almost all poor when they were younger/young adults. Yet clearly they have money now.

J.K. Rowling is a BILLIONAIRE. She was on welfare when she was writing -- she wrote while she was on the train going to her three jobs she had keeping her alive.

The man who got rich off slinkies was a poor factory-worker. Was he rich before? No.

Watch "How'd You Get So Rich" where they go to people's houses who all have $35+ million estates and you will learn that not a single one of them had money when they were younger. They all found a way to make it and worked their way up.


This view that you either screw people over or start out rich is just stupid. The truth is in America everyone has an equal chance of success. The only person holding you back is yourself -- nobody else.

[Harlot 2]

wow. according to your statistics and assumtions along with truefusion's beliefs.....it's not the rich that will have a hard time getting in to heaven. now it's the whites? hahahahahaha! this conversation is getting funnier and funnier. where are you getting those statistics and where are you getting information that whites are corrupting other countries so harshly that the natives have to dig in garbage cans? i want your resources.
that's like me saying blacks will have it easy finding their way in heaven if it's true people find god in jail. because when you look at the percentage of blacks in american compared to whites and compare the percentages of whites and blacks in jail, you'll notice an imbalance. but see....again....if i were to state that, i would only be showing my own ignorance. i just used those statistics as an example of how people can be so blinded by the truth.

First I would like to point out that what I state is not an assumption, it is fact. The idea that the vast majority of Americans don't know that European decedents and western corporations own the majority of the land not only in South Africa, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Zimbabwe, but in fact all of Africa. That truth is in no way absurd or funny. If there is a hell, yes, I believe that those who are pillaging third world countries of their resources will be some of the first people there. The majority of those pillagers happen to be white, if not all of them. However, this is nothing new, Europeans & white Americans have a long history of exploiting third world countries so this should be no surprise to you. People act all shocked when they find out that this stuff is still going on in the 21st century. As I state before, about 73% of the land in Zimbabwe is owned by whites, but yet whites account for only .03 percent of the population. When the leader of Zimbabwe attempted to redistribute the land, which was in fact stolen by the ancestors of those who currently possess it, the U.S. and Britain placed economic sanctions on Zimbabwe which only lead to further suffering. There is no way that we can have it both ways. If an individual or group of individuals do something wrong, it should be pointed out no matter what their race is. If it makes someone else of their race uncomfortable then that is just too bad.

Despite my discomfort regarding the status of my race in many areas of society, the facts are the facts. If someone says that prisons are packed with blacks, that is a fact. If someone say that blacks have by far the highest rate of STDs, that is a fact. I don't attempt to hide the flaws of my people or distort history. I may point out social and economic inequalities that could be a contributing factor, but the fact still remain that the end of the colonization of Africa consisted of pulling out militarily while maintaining ownership of the land. Therefore colonization never really ended. Military occupation ended, but not colonization. Kinda like when we pull out of Iraq, our companies will still own Iraqi oil fields despite the fact that the oil fields were taken by military force and never really owned by the U.S. and British corporations that are not pumping oil from them. Therefore if 30 years from now those oil fields in Iraq are passed down to the grandsons of the current stock holders of Exxon Mobile, BP, and Shell, they really have no legal basis to argue ownership of those oil fields if the Iraqi government decides to nationalize them and turn them back over to Iraqi owned companies. This is because they truly never owned it in the first place, it was stolen.

also, you claimed in anothe thread that you haven't even traveled out of the south or even past the borders of your own state. how much can you really possibly know first hand about things unless you believe in everything you hear or read? i have been to africa btw. they don't seem to be hurting or "poor" unless by their own choices. they have universities there and they have places where the small schools would be lucky enough to have enough pencils to go around and who live in mud huts and caverns they built themselves. your statistics may be correct. i don't know, but when i went to kenya and tansania, if those two countries are 70% white owned, it was SURELY not shown in the population. believe me. blacks are the majority as far as population. that was clearly shown. in fact, white people were scarce or they were hiding somewhere where i surely didn't see the abundance.
i know maybe three weeks in two countries isn't much time to know exactly what goes on, but i do know that countries like give GREAT credit for their gains through tourism. something you failed to mention in your statistics because your thinking is not balanced. and why is it that when i went there and would get personal with the locals, they actually claim to love whites? i know the answer to that as to why. do you? i wont answer right now only because i see it pointless to make this topic in to some sort of racial argument about who is getting in to heaven easier. also, i am smart enough to know that problems aren't due to any ONE thing.

First I will make clear that I could never leave my city and still know what is going on around the world. I don't have to fly to Africa when I have a massive amount of resources right in front of me and two libraries close by in order to research these issues. Secondly, I never stated that whites were a prevalent in Kenya or any other African country. I said that they own the majority of the land. The fact that whites own the majority of land in places such as Kenya, South Africa, and Zimbabwe can't be too much of a shock to you since less than 20 years ago a small minority of whites controlled South African political, economically and socially. I am sure that you know about the South African apartheid. People still don't understand how a small minority of whites were able to oppress a large majority of South Africans. I guess they also don't know how one white slave master was able to control hundreds of black slaves.

As for them loving whites, I am sure that they do. They allow them to control 73% of the land when there are barely any of them living in the country. They must love them a whole lot to allow such an atrocity. However, at the same time, a person can never justify hating all people of a particular race because of the actions of a few. So despite the fact that they are currently being oppressed by whites, that doesn't mean that they have to drink from the fountain of bitter hate. But they should know the truth and speak it when necessary. Just like the Civil Rights Movement in the United States, why didn't Martin Luther King hate whites? People tend to think that when ever someone points out wrongdoings, they must have hate in their hearts. I speak the truth based on my love for my people, not out of hate towards others. Neither do I speak the truth in order to persuade you or anyone else, but rather to defend those who are not here to defend and speak up for themselves (or are simply too ignorant of the truth to speak up). So whenever the lowly and poor is spoken down upon, I will tell you why they are lowly and poor. And that includes poor whites, Hispanics, Asians, blacks, Africans, and all the other poor people of the world that I can relate to and that are being exploited by the rich elites.
Edited August 4, 2010 by Harlot (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

well you just got under my skin now because that thinking is part of the problem in the united states you know...the racist comments? it's not so much that you think everything your read or hear is true, it's the fact that you can talk specifically about all the negativity of white people without being 1 bit objective. you might as well talk about the whites in the united states who pay mexicans from minimum wage to below minimum wage to work in the hot sun picking strawberries or apples all day or how we surpressed blacks so much that we leave them no choice to rob a liquer store to feed their suppressed families. asians own a large portian of the united states but you don't see me saying that asians are going to have a hard time getting in to heaven....hahahaso you don't need to travel to know what is going on in the world? you know, i really didn't expect a better answer from someone who is so biased in their thinking. now you are comparing kenya to south africa??? come on you can do better than that. but i am sure glad your true colors came out before i was being mislead in to thinking something different about you.continue on with your anti white talk. i have very few words for racism here...especially for someone who doesn't think he needs to travel and experience to have an original opinion.... especially in a thread that is talking about who is going to have it hard getting in to heaven.one last thing. i just commented on a friends facebook about "live aid". you don't even know what it is without googling it. and even if you google it, you wouldn't be able to know what it really was because it was before you were born. i saw a couple black people contribute to the cause, but the majority was ALL WHITE. you wont be reading any of that in your history books but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. i guess if what your saying is true, that whites control 70% of a whole continent where the only whites you usually see are tourists, then i guess we are giving people a pretty good education and putting money in to a country that wouldn't normally be there. maybe you can have a discussion with rpg about how the poor are too lazy to better themselves. but in my opinion, you both are fools and let's be honest....if white money wasn't flowing through african contries, africans would not only be dying of starvation because they don't believe in any sort of birth control, but they would still be living in their tribes in mud houses and mud corridoors that some still live in today because they CHOOSE to. not becuse they are being surpressed by the whites hahayou keep talking about how negative the whites have been on a whole continent. it's not the first time a black man blames the whites for so much control and destruction of their race.also, you posted again without giving sources for your racist comments. i will still be waiting for your sources of information....

Edited August 5, 2010 by anwiii (see edit history)

[Harlot 2]

well you just got under my skin now because that thinking is part of the problem in the united states you know...the racist comments? it's not so much that you think everything your read or hear is true, it's the fact that you can talk specifically about all the negativity of white people without being 1 bit objective. you might as well talk about the whites in the united states who pay mexicans from minimum wage to below minimum wage to work in the hot sun picking strawberries or apples all day or how we surpressed blacks so much that we leave them no choice to rob a liquer store to feed their suppressed families. asians own a large portian of the united states but you don't see me saying that asians are going to have a hard time getting in to heaven....hahaha
so you don't need to travel to know what is going on in the world? you know, i really didn't expect a better answer from someone who is so biased in their thinking. now you are comparing kenya to south africa??? come on you can do better than that. but i am sure glad your true colors came out before i was being mislead in to thinking something different about you.

continue on with your anti white talk. i have very few words for racism here...especially for someone who doesn't think he needs to travel and experience to have an original opinion.... especially in a thread that is talking about who is going to have it hard getting in to heaven.

one last thing. i just commented on a friends facebook about "live aid". you don't even know what it is without googling it. and even if you google it, you wouldn't be able to know what it really was because it was before you were born. i saw a couple black people contribute to the cause, but the majority was ALL WHITE. you wont be reading any of that in your history books but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. i guess if what your saying is true, that whites control 70% of a whole continent where the only whites you usually see are tourists, then i guess we are giving people a pretty good education and putting money in to a country that wouldn't normally be there.

maybe you can have a discussion with rpg about how the poor are too lazy to better themselves. but in my opinion, you both are fools and let's be honest....if white money wasn't flowing through african contries, africans would not only be dying of starvation because they don't believe in any sort of birth control, but they would still be living in their tribes in mud houses and mud corridoors that some still live in today because they CHOOSE to. not becuse they are being surpressed by the whites haha

you keep talking about how negative the whites have been on a whole continent. it's not the first time a black man blames the whites for so much control and destruction of their race.

also, you posted again without giving sources for your racist comments. i will still be waiting for your sources of information....

I am pretty much finished with this thread because it has degenerated into nothing more than denial and the discussion of things that are irrelevant such as travel and Google. What you thought of me. And all this other crap that has nothing to do with the topic. Its actually becoming insulting to my intelligence. You have refuted none of my claim, which are all true, except for accusing me of being negative towards white. It is either the truth or a lie. If the truth happens to be negative than that is something that white society should work on. If someone says something about black on black violence or hip hop, it may be negative, but its true.

As for "live aid", why would someone want crumbs when they can get the whole cake? They don't want your aid and pity, they want their land. Its amusing how someone can take the lands of a people and then try to relieve their guilt back starting some aid program to provide them with food, water, and health care. How about getting off their land so that they can provide for themselves and not have to rely on your handouts. I have nothing against "live aid", especially if its a provide organization. A lot of people have good intentions, but their efforts should not be used to justify what has been done to people over in third world countries, particularly Africa.

You say that if white money was not flowing through Africa they would be staring. No, if white would give them back their land they wouldn't be starving. If I put a gun to your head and take all your money, your home, and every thing you own, then you should not praise me if I visit you while you're living in a box and buy you dinner. I will say that I can buy my own dinner if you give my money, home, and every thing I owned back.

As for birth control that is a cultural thing. That is one problem that Western culture tend to have. They (or we) refuse to accept the cultures of others, and anything that differs from their culture is considered primitive. Lastly, you have to ask yourself why every continent on this earth, except for that big piece of ice called Antarctica, have been colonized by whites (if you have not ordered the invasion of a country, I am not talking about you)...literally occupied by military force. Do I need a source for that too? North America, South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia. In fact, Australia was actually occupied by blacks and they were almost wiped out completely (like Native Americans).

In conclusion. The biggest problem I have is people refusing to accept the truth and blaming the victim. I don't care how uncomfortable or "racist" the truth is. If a particular race has committed atrocities, then you need to try to improve that race, not blame me because I spoke up about it. Also a lot of times comment are mistaken for generalization, but I really don't have the energy to speak in a racially sensitive or politically correct tone. If you are not oppressing third world countries, then I am not talking about you, just the country that you live in and some of your people. If someone says that a lot of blacks are in jail, I would be ignorant to accuse them of making racist comments or generalizing. A lot of blacks are in jail and they are referring not to all blacks, but blacks who are in jail. If someone get bent all out of shapes about that, its because they refuse to accept the truth and cast blame on the individual telling it.
Edited August 5, 2010 by Harlot (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

me too. i hate racism and i hate the people that promote it. yes. hate is a strong word but well deserving.... i am sorry you coulnd't provide any sources for your "facts". but like all racists, they don't have any. just a mind that was shaped and formed by their parents and other adults who want to pass on their demented thoughts before they die to the younger generation of lost causes.you sure do write a lot for someone who was through with the conversation....

[Bikerman 2]

Well, since I read the thread trying to find some science, I may as well kick in my own thoughts.a) Has the white west exploited Africa (and most of the rest of the world)? You betcha - undeniable. Are all the current problems in Africa down to the 'white man'. Nope. There is some blame - much of it for how aid has been targetted and distributed. Global monies from institutions like the IMF has been historically tied to measures designed to deliver a market economy in the country receiving the money. That has meant, for example, that countries in Africa have been encouraged to turn land over from food production to crop-for-export. In countries where there is not a huge surplus of land to start with, that is bordering on criminal. The West has also played colonial power politics in Africa for so long that many current ethnic issues can be laid at our door - because we (I am a Brit) were the ones, in a lot of cases, who drew the borders of countries. Much of the time the newly created countries spanned unstable tribal mixtures which was always bound to lead to violence.HOWEVER, African countries need to start taking responsibility for themselves. The West is to blame for much, no denying that, but it is NOT entirely to blame for the massive levels of corruption in many African states. Neither is it entirely to blame for Mugabe's suicidal land-reform program that has essentially turned his country from a relatively prosperous country producing enough food for export, into a basket-case.c) Are poor people just lazy. Of course not. It is true that there is, certainly in the UK, a benefits sub-culture, where generations have not worked and subsist on state benefits. That is partly the blame of the state for allowing it to develop and partly the blame of the people concerned. One should not underestimate, however, exactly how much of a millstone such a family can be around the neck of any child, however well intentioned, and it seems rather simplistic and callous to blame such children for their own fate when they almost inevitably grow into the next generation of benefit receivers.There does seem to be some underlying acceptance that rich people work hard for their money and therefore deserve it. I would say that is a pile of .... well, nonsense, to put it politely. Is it seriously being maintained that the Hedge-fund manager, earning $100 million per annum, works ten thousand times harder than a hospital nurse, or a street cleaner, or a maid/house cleaner, who earns maybe $10,000. obviously that is garbage. The system is setup to allow the rich to keep their money and to make the poor pay disproportionately for running society. Most highly paid employees use the argument that 'you have to pay the best to get the best'. OK, but when you get below top management the argument changes to 'supply and demand'. In other words we can get a nurse anytime we like, but not an executive of a multinational company. Well, sorry, I think this is one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th and 21st century. The major skill possessed by many Chief Executives is possession of the sort of personality that lets you fire workers without loosing sleep. The notion that these men are somehow incredibly gifted is not one I have ever believed and having known a couple, not one I have ever witnessed either.Given a finite quantity of money in a society, it seems obscene to me that the top fraction of a percentage earn sums of money so large that they are telephone numbers to most people. They cannot possibly need so much and the notion that they are somehow 'worth it' seems to me to be ridiculous - they have it and others don't. They got it by either gambling other peoples money on the markets, firing lots of people who actually make things, or inheriting it from mummy and daddy. Very occasionally someone from the working class will make it big but this is very rare and a glance at the social mobility stats for the US and the UK show it is getting rarer. The US notion that anyone can achieve anything - and even become president - is a rather cruel joke played on the gullible. You can do better than you were, and you can be moderately successful with hard work, but you need a lot more than hard work to join the elite mega-rich.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Bikerman (see edit history)

[rpgsearcherz 5]

Well, since I read the thread trying to find some science, I may as well kick in my own thoughts.a) Has the white west exploited Africa (and most of the rest of the world)? You betcha - undeniable.
Are all the current problems in Africa down to the 'white man'. Nope. There is some blame - much of it for how aid has been targetted and distributed. Global monies from institutions like the IMF has been historically tied to measures designed to deliver a market economy in the country receiving the money. That has meant, for example, that countries in Africa have been encouraged to turn land over from food production to crop-for-export. In countries where there is not a huge surplus of land to start with, that is bordering on criminal. The West has also played colonial power politics in Africa for so long that many current ethnic issues can be laid at our door - because we (I am a Brit) were the ones, in a lot of cases, who drew the borders of countries. Much of the time the newly created countries spanned unstable tribal mixtures which was always bound to lead to violence.
HOWEVER, African countries need to start taking responsibility for themselves. The West is to blame for much, no denying that, but it is NOT entirely to blame for the massive levels of corruption in many African states. Neither is it entirely to blame for Mugabe's suicidal land-reform program that has essentially turned his country from a relatively prosperous country producing enough food for export, into a basket-case.

c) Are poor people just lazy. Of course not. It is true that there is, certainly in the UK, a benefits sub-culture, where generations have not worked and subsist on state benefits. That is partly the blame of the state for allowing it to develop and partly the blame of the people concerned. One should not underestimate, however, exactly how much of a millstone such a family can be around the neck of any child, however well intentioned, and it seems rather simplistic and callous to blame such children for their own fate when they almost inevitably grow into the next generation of benefit receivers.
There does seem to be some underlying acceptance that rich people work hard for their money and therefore deserve it. I would say that is a pile of .... well, nonsense, to put it politely. Is it seriously being maintained that the Hedge-fund manager, earning $100 million per annum, works ten thousand times harder than a hospital nurse, or a street cleaner, or a maid/house cleaner, who earns maybe $10,000. obviously that is garbage. The system is setup to allow the rich to keep their money and to make the poor pay disproportionately for running society. Most highly paid employees use the argument that 'you have to pay the best to get the best'. OK, but when you get below top management the argument changes to 'supply and demand'. In other words we can get a nurse anytime we like, but not an executive of a multinational company. Well, sorry, I think this is one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th and 21st century. The major skill possessed by many Chief Executives is possession of the sort of personality that lets you fire workers without loosing sleep. The notion that these men are somehow incredibly gifted is not one I have ever believed and having known a couple, not one I have ever witnessed either.

Given a finite quantity of money in a society, it seems obscene to me that the top fraction of a percentage earn sums of money so large that they are telephone numbers to most people. They cannot possibly need so much and the notion that they are somehow 'worth it' seems to me to be ridiculous - they have it and others don't. They got it by either gambling other peoples money on the markets, firing lots of people who actually make things, or inheriting it from mummy and daddy. Very occasionally someone from the working class will make it big but this is very rare and a glance at the social mobility stats for the US and the UK show it is getting rarer. The US notion that anyone can achieve anything - and even become president - is a rather cruel joke played on the gullible. You can do better than you were, and you can be moderately successful with hard work, but you need a lot more than hard work to join the elite mega-rich.

The hedge fund manager brought in an over 130% increase in investments in a one year period. Considering he is using hundreds of billions of people's money that means he earned THEM hundreds of billions. When he's getting less than 0.3% of what he helped OTHERS get I feel he DEFINITELY deserved it.

ANYONE can become a stock broker. ANYONE can become a lawyer. ANYONE can become a doctor. ANYONE can become (insert thing here). Blaming others because YOU chose not to become any is not their fault -- it's yours.

It's almost as bad as the people who complain because military veterans and active duty military personnel get free dinners on Veteran's Day. Nobody is stopping them from joining the military for the benefit -- but instead they would rather cry about how "unfair" it is.

I have absolutely no respect for anyone who thinks their lack of success depends on anyone other than themselves. If you aren't making $100 million a year that's your own fault -- nobody else's.



Edit : To take it further. Let's make an earning cap on resources.

Now we have no cars. We have no computers. We have no electricity. We have no beds. We have no (insert item here).

The whole point of inventing new things is to earn money -- otherwise what drive is there?

Instead of complaining about those who earn a lot, thank them for allowing you to live life the way YOU do.
Edited August 5, 2010 by rpgsearcherz (see edit history)

[Bikerman 2]

The hedge fund manager brought in an over 130% increase in investments in a one year period. Considering he is using hundreds of billions of people's money that means he earned THEM hundreds of billions. When he's getting less than 0.3% of what he helped OTHERS get I feel he DEFINITELY deserved it.

Brought in investments? To whom? The hedge fund manager doesn't work for those companies in which the money is invested, he/she works for him/herself by investing clients money. They basically take the money of the very wealthy and use it in a variety of ways to make more. Do you think that appears from nowhere? They basically redistribute money to the richest - a reverse Robin Hood role. A favourite is short-selling. So these heros of yours - like George Sorros, make their fortunes by using rich peoples money to bully the market in such a way that (in the case of Sorros) the Bank of England looses billions trying to stop him shorting the currency and forcing a devaluation, which would essentially make 60 million people poorer - all so that he can give the vastly wealthy a few more bilions which they don't need to start with.

ANYONE can become a stock broker. ANYONE can become a lawyer. ANYONE can become a doctor. ANYONE can become (insert thing here). Blaming others because YOU chose not to become any is not their fault -- it's yours.

You do talk some nonsense. To become a stockbroker you are going to want some money from mommy and daddy to do your first degree and then hopefully your MBA - call it 60-100 grand. Come into my class and tell my students exactly how easy it is to become a doctor, lawyer or stockbroker and the laughter would be deafening. Many of them live on the local council estate with one parent, on benefit, and several siblings. They may get one meal a day - the one we give them at school. Hometime brings arguments with parents over whether they can afford 5 pounds for a school trip to the museum (usually no, because dad/mom has to buy his/her booze/ciggs). Talk to these kids about university and they will think you are a nutcase. They have as much change of getting a degree as they have of flying to the moon - even if they are born with the brains to study at a high level.

It's almost as bad as the people who complain because military veterans and active duty military personnel get free dinners on Veteran's Day. Nobody is stopping them from joining the military for the benefit -- but instead they would rather cry about how "unfair" it is.

What the hell has this got to do with anything? Total straw man argument. Who exactly is complaining about veterans getting a free dinner?

I have absolutely no respect for anyone who thinks their lack of success depends on anyone other than themselves. If you aren't making $100 million a year that's your own fault -- nobody else's.

Yes, it is clear that you have little respect. You clearly live in a world where everyone has the same chances, drunken parents don't ruin their children's lives, money is available to the poor to study higher education and postgrad courses and everyone can be anything. Sounds like a great place, shame it isn't on earth.

Edit : To take it further. Let's make an earning cap on resources.Now we have no cars. We have no computers. We have no electricity. We have no beds. We have no (insert item here).
The whole point of inventing new things is to earn money -- otherwise what drive is there?

What a grubby little world you live in. Most people I know do what they do because they enjoy it and get enough money to pay the bills - and most people I know are really lucky because they have jobs which they can enjoy. In your world people do things only for money? What a sad world that must be.

Furthermore, the idea that a cap on personal income would stop invention is complete nonsense and is easily refuted by a quick glance at the history books.
Between 1948 and 1965 the US had a top rate of income tax of over 90% - effectively a pretty good cap on high earnings, since you only keep 10c in every dollar you make over the higher income limit - not exactly a motivator in your world.
Did the US fall apart? Did electricity stop? Did all the cars vanish? Did invention stop? Of course it didn't. Actually many people regard this as a golden age in the US. Invention carried on - sufficient to put a man on the moon - despite the super-rich loosing 90% of every dollar they made over the higher income limit.

Instead of complaining about those who earn a lot, thank them for allowing you to live life the way YOU do.

Oh, I am supposed to be grateful to my 'betters' am I? The fact that I decided to use my talents to teach rather than accrue a personal fortune is clearly nowhere near as much use to society as forcing companies into liquidation and grabbing the profits from betting they would fail...how could I not see that I wonder?
What a weird world you inhabit.

[Bikerman 2]

The Forbes highest-paid people in the world were almost all poor when they were younger/young adults. Yet clearly they have money now.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?Here's the Forbes top 10:
1 Bill Gates - wealthy middle-class family
2 Warren Buffett - son of a Congressman
3 Lawrence Ellison - middle class Jewish family
4 Christy Walton - inherited from husband
5 Jim C. Walton - inherited from family
6 Alice Walton - Inherited from daddy
7 S. Robson Walton - Inherited from daddy
8 Michael Bloomberg - middle class Jewish family
9 Charles Koch - Rich and famous daddy
10 David Koch - ditto

Now you say that they almost all started poor. Which 'almost all' is that then, because I can't see anyone in the list who was even slightly hard-up, never mind poor.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

Becoming a teacher is your own choice. You could have become something else. That's the whole point -- it's all about choices.I know many teachers who are happy with their jobs. They aren't complaining about how others make more than them though. If you really have that big of an issue with it, quit your job and become something else.As for your claim I insinuated anything about people being "better" than you, you seriously need to re-read my posts. I never once claimed anyone is better than anyone else. In fact, I've stated completely the opposite. As I said, everyone has the same chances of success. How that equates to someone being better than someone else is mind-boggling, at best. I think the issue is that you're angry about the choices you've made and you want to reflect those upon others.There are some people who make it in this world because it's given to them; yes. But the brutal fact is most work their own way up. I'm 100% sure that Oprah, for example, had nothing given to her (especially considering she was extremely poor and lived in the slums before becoming successful). I'm 100% sure J.K. Rowling, with her welfare, didn't have over a billion dollars just tossed to her out of thin air (especially considering it took her over 5 years of being turned down by every publisher before she finally had one buy a book of hers, with the comment that she "better not quit her day job."). I'm 100% sure that Bill Gates did not have someone flat out give him the invention of the DOS operating system.I could literally list over 100 people who have gone from nothing to 100+ million on their own. Out of that list, only a select few had money to begin with (such as Bill Gates -- but his invention could have been made by anyone).Your flawed perception seems to be that those who have money were given it. I'd highly suggest looking into those people instead and realizing how wrong you are.Even Wal-Mart's founder (Sam Walton) was extremely poor. He used a bank loan to start up a very small store in his hometown. It was his ideas that allowed him to expand; not his money (especially considering he had none!).As far as I know Walt Disney also started out pretty poor, but I'd have to re-verify that.

Edited August 5, 2010 by rpgsearcherz (see edit history)

[Bikerman 2]

The Forbes highest-paid people in the world were almost all poor when they were younger/young adults. Yet clearly they have money now.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?

Here's the Forbes top 10:

1 Bill Gates - wealthy middle-class family

2 Warren Buffett - son of a Congressman

3 Lawrence Ellison - middle class Jewish family

4 Christy Walton - inherited from husband

5 Jim C. Walton - inherited from family

6 Alice Walton - Inherited from daddy

7 S. Robson Walton - Inherited from daddy

8 Michael Bloomberg - middle class Jewish family

9 Charles Koch - Rich and famous daddy

10 David Koch - ditto

 

Now you say that they almost all started poor. Which 'almost all' is that then, because I can't see anyone in the list who was even slightly hard-up, never mind poor.

 

PS JK Rowling came from a comfortable middle-class background. The reason she was on welfare is because she hadn't made it as a successful writer - her own choice, not enforced poverty

The man who got rich off slinkies was a poor factory-worker. Was he rich before? No.[/quopte]

Another complete invention

Richard James (and his wife) invented Slinky. James was a Naval Officer, not some pauper. He had a breakdown after the success (or a mid life crisis) and went off to live in Bolivia with a religious cult. His wife took over and made the huge success of the early toy (Richard James left her in debt).

[Bikerman 2]

Becoming a teacher is your own choice. You could have become something else. That's the whole point -- it's all about choices.
I know many teachers who are happy with their jobs. They aren't complaining about how others make more than them though. If you really have that big of an issue with it, quit your job and become something else.

Whose complaining? I'm pointing out the inequity in response to your misleading inaccurate and pretty much made up postings.

As for your claim I insinuated anything about people being "better" than you, you seriously need to re-read my posts. I never once claimed anyone is better than anyone else. In fact, I've stated completely the opposite. As I said, everyone has the same chances of success. How that equates to someone being better than someone else is mind-boggling, at best. I think the issue is that you're angry about the choices you've made and you want to reflect those upon others.

So why should I be grateful to them for 'letting me live the life I do' if they are not my betters? If they have the power to control me, as you seem to imply, then they must be higher up some scale....

I'm 100% sure that Bill Gates did not have someone flat out give him the invention of the DOS operating system.

You don't know what you are talking about. I lecture IT so please don't start *BLEEP*ting on that as well as the rest.

I could literally list over 100 people who have gone from nothing to 100+ million on their own. Out of that list, only a select few had money to begin with (such as Bill Gates -- but his invention could have been made by anyone).

Go on then.(Gates didn't invent anything. Do your research). He bought QDOS, from Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products - the real author - for 50 grand. He then just rebranded it as MS-DOS and sold it to IBM (who had already approached him for an OS) and made his fortune.
Edited August 5, 2010 by Bikerman (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

i see your point to a certain extent, rpg, but really....life doesn't work as cut and dry as your saying it does. there are many things to factor in. also, to say if someone isn't rich, the only ones to blame is theirselves? that's like saying if someone IS rich, then all the credit should be given to THEM. in fact, both are just not true. if you re-read the bikerman's list of the top 10 wealthiest people according to forbes, 1/2 of them inherited the money. they didn't even work for it.why don't you tell all those starving kids in africa that are dying every day that they can be anyone they want to be and don't have to worry about hunger ever again. you are talking about america being the american dream, but in fact, that is all it is unless it comes true. even with hard work and 100% effort, some people aren't meant to make a heck of a lot of money and it's really not under their power 100%.sure, there are grants and student loans to help people through college, but they aren't available to everyone. also, what if someone never graduated from high school due to their parents being sick and they had to take care of them. according to you, they would have to make a choice between not caring for their loved ones and going to college to make the all might dollar. believe it or not, rpg....some people don't even see a choice in the matter. yes....there is one ultimately which is why i see your point somewhat.the american dream you talk about seems easy to achieve where in FACT it is not. and in fact, some kids don't have a good chance to achieve it compared to the next guy who is already more wealthy due to their family... so all things are NOT created equal. i may agree that most of what we have right now is due to our own choices, but a lot of what we wanted and don't have could have come from outside influences that we had no control over.now to quote one of the richest men in the world, "If I wanted to, I could hire 10,000 people to do nothing but paint my picture every day for the rest of my life. And the GDP would go up. But the utility of the product would be zilch, and I would be keeping those 10,000 people from doing AIDS research, or teaching, or nursing. I don't do that though". what that means to me, is that some people aren't meant to be rich or have a lot of money. some people are meant to do other things....most of which is in their nature to do anyway. being poor or not having as much money as the next guy holds a lot of value in society. i just wish other people can argue THAT instead of arguing an assumption that anyone can be rich and being rich is not that hard to do if you make the choice.