‘It Is Utterly Impossible to Be Rich without Committing Injustice'

[joe1776]

The job of the government to manage cultures. Really? What a completely weird idea. Of course, the statement is vague far beyond the point of being meaningless.

Labeling your debate opponent's arguments as weird and vague doesn't qualify as debate. If you don't explain why my statement is vague or weird, it can be fairly assumed that you aren't able to explain yourself.

Also a weird statement. Japan has a competitive economy.
The economy did not create the culture. They all look Japanese.

You created a strawman. I said that competitive economies create cultural disadvantages. I didn't say they created cultures.

In the USA, Asians have a long history of being heavily discriminated
against, something few Americans seem aware of now, as no
big fuss has been made as is the case with other minority groups.

But you deny that the US government had any hand in managing the problem of discrimination (because the idea that governments manage cultures is weird).

There are a lot of subcultures in the USA, native tribes, and
immigrants from everywhere. Some groups are very successful,
some are not. Sure we can predict winners and losers and it is
on the basis of that group's culture.

You are completely missing the point. It should not matter that some cultural groups are better equipped to win the competition than others. The point is that, in a cooperative economy, no one would have to compete for the basics of survival: food, shelter and so on.

 

[joe1776]

You can walk into a hospital with two Black little girls. One born to wealthy parents, one born to poor parents and know that the odds of a bright economic future aren't equal. I suppose that ain't fair either. How do you fix that?

The biggest indicator of a person's future success is not the color of their skin but the amount of money their parents have in the bank.

Money is necessary now to facilitate trade but it also facilitates crime, corruption and a host of other problems.

Someday in the future, we humans will invent an efficient, decision-making process of governing free of corruption. That will make possible a cooperative economy that doesn't need money.

 

[1213]

How do you determine when wanting to have a bit
of surplus over your minimum daily needs turns into greed?

It is interesting question what is minimum. I don’t think that to be non-greedy you must live in extremely poor conditions. I think it is ok to want and have nice things. But if one wants unnecessary amounts of something, that is greedy and not good. And if one has plethora of things and sees someone in need and doesn’t help the other, that I think is not good.

 

[Audie]

It is interesting question what is minimum. I don’t think that to be non-greedy you must live in extremely poor conditions. I think it is ok to want and have nice things. But if one wants unnecessary amounts of something, that is greedy and not good. And if one has plethora of things and sees someone in need and doesn’t help the other, that I think is not good.

Very hard indeed to figure all / any of
that out.

As for the ideologs here-
I just think we are seeing a lot of very
shallow people taking an opportunity
to do some virtue signaling.

 

[Audie]

Labeling your debate opponent's arguments as weird and vague doesn't qualify as debate. If you don't explain why my statement is vague or weird, it can be fairly assumed that you aren't able to explain yourself.



You created a strawman. I said that competitive economies create cultural disadvantages. I didn't say they created cultures.



But you deny that the US government had any hand in managing the problem of discrimination (because the idea that governments manage cultures is weird).



You are completely missing the point. It should not matter that some cultural groups are better equipped to win the competition than others. The point is that, in a cooperative economy, no one would have to compete for the basics of survival: food, shelter and so on.

Nothing you say qualifies as debate let alone the most
vaguely realistic ideas

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The biggest indicator of a person's future success is not the color of their skin but the amount of money their parents have in the bank.

You say that as if there isn't any correlation between those two factors.

 

[Nakosis]

You say that as if there isn't any correlation between those two factors.

You don't believe wealthy Black folks exist?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You don't believe wealthy Black folks exist?

Do you understand what "correlation" means?

 

[Nakosis]

Do you understand what "correlation" means?

Yes, so are you going to answer my question now?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, so are you going to answer my question now?

If you haven't figured out the answer to your question yourself, then the answer to my question is actually "no."

 

[Nakosis]

If you haven't figured out the answer to your question yourself, then the answer to my question is actually "no."

Well, it is what your question implied. Perhaps if you reread my post you'll understand the relevance.

However if you just want to ask about word definitions all day, I don't think that discussion is going to be very interesting.

 

[Milton Platt]

Economics is said to be the dismal science.

Economics seen thro' a religious filter is garbage.

True on both counts. If you want to have a room full of people who disagree on more things than they seem to agree on, have a conference of economists.