Chris Jones: "Being Poor Sucks"

And the poor can kill the rich. Yeah, it's against the law, but the same government that says so is the same most rich people purport to loathe. And you'll find plenty of condemnations in the Bible for murder and greed. The two people killed in Acts, for example, are struck down for lying about their selfishness - and shock of being exposed.

The "because they can" argument is the most spurious, dangerous argument in the history of mankind. And, no, I'm not advocating murder. I'm saying that once you use that nonsense as a rationale, anything goes.

 

Some people will have more wealth than others. They can choose to do with that wealth whatever they wish. I will do the same with whatever I'm lucky enough (or work hard enough) to acquire.

And it is disconcerting to see people here - and Alma is not the first - basically advocate for violence against those meanyfaces who have more money than we Great Unwashed have.

Yes, I know, there's the mealy mouthed copout: "Uh, uh . . .I'm not ADVOCATING violence!! Just saying!!!!!"

On Springsteen's current tour, he sings a line from a song that, referring to bankers and such, "If I had a gun, I'd find the bastards and shoot 'em on sight . . ." and the crowd erupts.

This is where we are. Congratulations.

Just sayin.'

 

Neither of us are right. Unless one's a believer in moral absolutism it's impossible to come up with a "right" answer to the question of what's the worst thing wrong with the world that could be fixed by a huge injection of cash, though I'll grant it's an interesting question to think about. I do think a few problems like that exist, though. There are very few areas where more funds would make real lasting change, since poverty generally is not just a problem of money, but some do exist.

Where would you start, out of curiosity?

 

Because just because you make $100K today doesn't mean you won't be on an unemployment line tomorrow. That used to be a common line of thinking among people who grew up in the 30s.

I drive a 22-year-old Lexus (bought when it was a spring chicken of 13). And I could buy a brand new one tomorrow. Paying cash. Wouldn't dream of it, though. My old one runs fine, and if I get laid off (or some other emergency comes up) I would feel like an idiot for spending $37,000 on new car smell.

The difference in the way I think and some others do is that I do not think I am "denying" myself anything. Sure, the new car might be nicer in a few ways, but would I get $37,000 more enjoyment? Not to mention how much my insurance rates would skyrocket? Not that I can see.

 

I <i>abhor</i> violence. Fiercely. You can't tell me what I am advocating when I say I'm not advocating it. Revolution is a sobering, sorrowful idea. Again from my faith: It's not what God intended for the community of people.

But the "because we can" rationale/motivation is the most basic, brute thinking there is. If I extrapolate that thinking out to its logical conclusion, I get the disgusting, bloody genocides of our history. If you choose to attribute that to some other kind of thinking, go ahead. I'm drawing the corollary, which I've drawn before.

I <i>suppose</i> it's provocative. History suggests it's common. And no, there <i>isn't</i> a one-to-one relationship between acquisition/protection of wealth and violence. But there <i>is</i> absolutely a one-to-one relationship between "because we can" and violence. <i>Far from advocating it</i>, I'm suggesting such a brute way of thinking is a path that leads straight to hell.

I believe there are very few circumstances in which violence will be rewarded in the eyes of God. Very few. And none of the kinds described above. I can't control how you choose to read what I write. But if I'm responding to "because we can" then rest assured: I'm responding to "because we can." That's an awful rationale for acquiring wealth. Those conditions create chickens who desire to roost.

 

Alma, for what it's worth, I read what you wrote and took it the way you meant it. That might be because I actually read it.

 

Piotr, suppose I have a friend who drinks and drives. If I tell him "Some day, this will end unhappily", I am not advocating car crashes.

 

if any of you REALLY get off on paying bills, let me know. I got plenty right now. And no hope.

 

Violence generally doesn't affect the wealthy as a whole due to wealth alone. The actions of the wealthy to acquire their wealth has a lot to do with violence dating across the course of history.

As to redistribution of wealth, it comes down to why people want wealth. Do they truly have good intentions or are they seeking power? I am convinced liberalism does little to help people, but how can communitarian values become the norm without the selfish screaming socialism?

 

And that is the difference. Half of Americans are OK with helping others with extra money while the other half would rather help themselves and keep this extra money.

 

This strikes the best chord.