I1L2T3 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I don't think anyone as argued differently, I'm not motivated by greed, I could easily earn more than I do but I choose not to, but not everyone is the same and why should someone that wants more be prevented from achieving their goals. They shouldn't be prevented. I agree. But there should be limits when the rewards outpace what is acceptable to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I've wished for that all my life and it still hasn't happened. Your "society" is obviously very different to mine and many other people's. It would be if it were true. As it stands today people are forced to do things they hate just to make ends meat for themselves while turning over most of the real profit they have generated to the few greedy selfish people at the top. Those people at the top also have an uncanny knack of disregarding or even re-writing the law whenever it suits them. Again envy, the only person the blame for your lack of achievement is you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 It would be if it were true. As it stands today people are forced to do things they hate just to make ends meat for themselves while turning over most of the real profit they have generated to the few greedy selfish people at the top. Those people at the top also have an uncanny knack of disregarding or even re-writing the law whenever it suits them. Do you have an issue with someone who's got to the top through their own effort and work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolli_pop Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I have a friend who is an orthopaedic surgeon who also only does NHS work..for which he is very well paid...would he do it if he was paid the same as a roadsweeper..probably not ..my point is not that people want to always maximise their salary but want a decent differential... Differential is the key - happier societies tend to have relatively little differential between those at the bottom and those at the top. Unhappiness starts to kick in when those at the top are earning vast sums out of all proportion to the incomes of those at the bottom. Grossly unequal societies are not happy societies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 They shouldn't be prevented. I agree. But there should be limits when the rewards outpace what is acceptable to society. There are limits set by us, we can all choose not to support the business of someone we feel as too much money. How else could limits be set and what happens when someone reaches that limit? What would I do with my profits when I get to the limit and what incentive would I have to continue producing something once I reach the limit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Differential is the key - happier societies tend to have relatively little differential between those at the bottom and those at the top. Unhappiness starts to kick in when those at the top are earning vast sums out of all proportion to the incomes of those at the bottom. Grossly unequal societies are not happy societies. But what happens if the effort put in by someone at the top is out of proportion to someone at the bottom,as you put it? Should the one at the top be penalised just cos someone else couldn't be bothered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Differential is the key - happier societies tend to have relatively little differential between those at the bottom and those at the top. Unhappiness starts to kick in when those at the top are earning vast sums out of all proportion to the incomes of those at the bottom. Grossly unequal societies are not happy societies. Where are these happy societies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 There are limits set by us, we can all choose not to support the business of someone we feel as too much money. How else could limits be set and what happens when someone reaches that limit? What would I do with my profits when I get to the limit and what incentive would I have to continue producing something once I reach the limit? There is a challenge. You want to be able to reward the innovators and enablers, the likes of Bill Gates. But you don't want to institutionalise corporate theft either - likes of the bankers. At the same time people need to be assured a basic standard of living. I think you already invented your own version of PROUT economics on here before, I seem to remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimatesens Posted December 23, 2011 Author Share Posted December 23, 2011 Do you have a shred of evidence that we could have achieved what we have achieved without the desire for some people to become wealthy, is there a country that has achieved what we have achieved in which this equal system as worked with everyone being equal, with equal wealth. I don't need any evidence. Your asking me to prove we could have done world history a different way. What happened, happened because of the various exegencies of the times. Different countries and individuals made success or failure within a social context. I never said "we could have achieved what we have achieved without the desire for some people to become wealthy," or that we should have an equal system as worked with everyone being equal, with equal wealth.[sic]" I said (or am trying very hard to say), lets back our currency with electricity and distribute energy generation as much as possible because this system doesn't work for most people and everything is going wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimatesens Posted December 23, 2011 Author Share Posted December 23, 2011 What happens to those that say "no!" ? It would be like national service. I agree it's not a perfect solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.