Amazon.com Widgets
  • Rich people are superior to others

    I mean if they were not superior they would not get rich. Rich people are rich because they are smarter/more talented than others or just work really hard. Just look at Sillicon valey wizards they are creating useful products for ordinary people and provide jobs for them. Rich people are the driving forces of progress.

  • Well duhh..Of course they are

    I am poor. I get no money. People who work or have savings or are millionaires or billionaires have money. That makes them better than me and better than most people. Its pretty simple. So yes. They are superior,because money. Having money makes you better and that will always be a thing.

  • Um, how, exactly?

    " I mean if they were not superior they would not get rich." Whoever said this has to be one of the most ignorant, uneducated people I've ever come across on the debates. There are so many factors that go into determining how one gets wealthy, those being things like social factors, cultural factors, and individual factors. If someone is missing or falling short in either aspect, they're almost doomed to become "wealthy" if we're talking about masses of money and power. Wealth is almost always inherited, as one can innately be born into the factors required to be wealthy without even having to try. Luck is also a factor, but those born into wealth are obviously in no need of such a thing. Those who aren't born wealthy have everything in front of them to tackle, and if they take advantage of them, then yes, they do deserve to be wealthy, but that doesn't make them "better" than someone who may be poor and intellectually superior like Malala Yousafzai or Ghandi.

  • Absolutely not, I can't see how...

    The argument that superior people get rich faster is flawed beyond belief. A person with an IQ of '5' could become rich through inheritance, lottery winnings, luck e.T.C. Whereas a hardworking person with 3 jobs may only make enough to get by for that year.

    You also have to take into account opportunity.

    Example:
    Person A and Person B are exactly the same. Same ambition, same ideology. They both want to become engineers.

    Person A lives in the middle of a booming city where huge construction projects are begun daily, and there are hundreds of different schools with many great minds to teach the next generation any course they wish to learn. The booming economy means more risks are being taken and graduates are getting chances to make a career right out of school.

    Person B lives in a slum.

    Who is more likely to get rich?

  • They are luckier, or born with more privilege, or better opportunities.

    Every wealthy individual made their wealth by leveraging the labor of the working class.

    I do not begrudge them their ingenuity, quite the opposite. But I scoff at the notion they created their wealth independantly, as they used the labor of those they pretend did not contribute, in order to make their fortune.

    Mitt Romeny's election highlighted the difference between Oligarchs who do not value, appreciate or respect the labor class, and small business owners who know they profit only due to the skill of their team.

    The GOP is run and funded by the oligarchs, while claiming to represent the laborers and small business owners.

  • Rich people are all MUTTS

    Rich people use money as a weapon to crush the little poor middle class people.

    For example Litigation

    If both sides are paying attorney fees, the rich guy wins 99.99% of the time.

    .01 % is one guy with balls and brains, and the rich people get to watch their monies burn up in litigation costs after 10 year battles, and since they love money more than GOD the father, they usually get brain cancer and die before they can spend their money and enjoy it. They lose control when the little guy dictates the show and does not follow their lead and orders, so while they squander millions of dollars in litigation costs, they either get brain cancer or a stroke. The pressure becomes too great for them, because rich people are very weak people, and the poor and spiritual will overcome them all the time when tested. Those who are first will be last and those who are last will be first. Young rich young men have a difficult entering the kingdom of heaven, because they are treacherous people that care more about money than the goodwill of people and their families.

  • They are members of a degenerated, predatory class in its death throes

    The rich are part of the bourgeois class of the capitalist status quo. They are the inheritors of capitalist liberalism.

    In the strictest sense, Libertarianism is a stage of liberalism. The capitalist stage in the development of liberal philosophy and economy in which the merchant became liberated from the lord and the town became liberated from the countryside. That stage of liberalism lived on to conquer nations and subjugate peoples in the name of a twisted conception of economic freedom in which the bourgeois class was free to build up an empire of capital to enslave the productive class in a system of compensation control and distribution control. This was most purely exemplified and codified in the emergence of fascism in the 20th century and its continued existence under other names.

    The next stage of liberalism is the socialist stage, in which the productive class abolishes the bourgeois class and smashes the economic slavery which was once called economic freedom along with the imperialism and wage slavery that accompanied it in order to build a true economic freedom, which is that of the working class' right to full compensation for labour done and control over distribution of its own produce for its own benefit.

    The final stage of liberalism, the communist stage, is one in which the worker's state is no longer necessary to direct the cooperation of the worker councils, as the economic apparatus of free and equal distribution in exchange for labour becomes self sustaining reality and the proletariat has developed full class consciousness and cohesiveness to achieve all of its ends and endeavors both as a collection of individuals and as a class.

    Furthermore, none of this has to do with personal freedom of speech, press, or anything else. Communism deals only with economic freedom of the working class and abolition of the exploitative class.

    So, the rich are not superior. If anything, they are inferior to those who toil to feed them and do the noblest and most productive work for the people. The rich have as their legacy only genocide, war, fascism, and eternal exploitation of the very class that feeds them. They should be stripped of their privileges as soon as possible.

  • The myth that the wealthy are smarter and harder working is actually an ideological concept to fool the working poor.

    The wealthy use myths of opportunity and freedom to keep the lower classes complacent and apathetic. The truth is success depends largely on opportunity and access to resources. Wealth is usually inherited through family lines. Rich people are not more smart, innovative, or talented. Read the OUTLIERS by Malcolm Gladwell, this book debunks this entire notion that the wealthy are somehow harder working, and more creative. "That why its called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it" George Carlin.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.