Moralizing vs. Compassion

[MTL]

I'm rather amazed how this is focusing on Bill Gates.

I only chose him as an example of how money, in and of itself, is wrongly vilified for all the evil in this world.

I don't disagree with anything you guys have said about him.  At all.

My ultimate point was that simply being poor does not, in and of itself, make one morally better than the wealthy.

Yes, the wealthy, despite their vast contributions, may still enjoy luxuries while children perish, that is true.

Does Bill Gates profit by an industry that contributes to many social and environmental problems?  Sure.
But it is also true that to become wealthy, unless you inherit or win the money, is WORK.
It takes balls and brains and a lot of risk and hard work to accumulate that kind of wealth.

I am poor.

But I have, myself, in the past, run a small business for my family,
and it was backbreaking work.

The public are so prepared, especially nowadays, to scrutinize every move you make, as a businessperson,
sue you at the drop of a hat, shame you, and once bad things happen, even hold you responsible for not having had superhuman foresight into the future.  People take advantage of your goodwill and themselves don't care how well your business fares, or how your small profit margin suffers.  You have to swallow your pride and sometimes your beliefs, to cater to assholes and idiots, all the time...or your business can be subverted.

So when someone is self-made, and successful,
and is able to give something back,
I am mindful of how hard they had to work,
how smart and how tough they must be,
of the risks they took and the sacrifices they made.

I am also mindful that to invest, or profit, nowadays,
to any notable degree of success,
in a way that is COMPLETELY UNASSIALABLE and entirely without fault,
is very difficult, indeed.

Most products or services in some way could be criticized for being, at some level,
unethical, dirty, cruel, inhumane, wasteful, damaging...etc.

Despite all your best efforts as an informed, ethical businessperson,
somebody, somewhere, at some point in time,
will find fault with your business.

Of course I am also aware that some of the most successful businesspeople also got to where they are by being unscrupulous, ruthless and bloodthirsty, crushing others underfoot to get to the top, stealing ideas, breaking the law, and then shamelessly hiding their tracks.

But I am baffled as to at what point you guys got the idea
that because I acknowledge Bill Gates' philanthropic work,
that must mean I am his apologist or admirer.

It's beside the point.  I just cited him as an example.

I am simply acknowledging that money, in and of itself, is NOT the root of all evil as it is so often made out to be;

it is how that wealth was acquired, and (ab)used that wrongly results in that conclusion.

In the right hands, great wealth is still able to do more good than poverty can.

So, imagine, if you can:

a poor person, with brains and determination,
who comes up with the "perfect" business idea:

They are able to profit, and greatly,
with a perfect business idea....no one can rip off or copy or imitate it;
and it is without fault.....ethical, clean, humanitarian, etc.

Then, having somehow built up this mythical,
miraculously completely-blameless-yet-still-wildly-successful business
into a multi-billion-dollar empire,

....they keep absolutely nothing of its profits for themselves,
beyond the bare necessity for survival...

and although they pay all their employees very well,
and although the shareholders make money hand-over-fist,

every single employee and shareholder is equally devoted to recycling ALL of the profits
back into the betterment of the world,
keeping nothing for themselves above what is necessary to live a healthy life.

So even though it was YOUR brains and the enormous risks YOU took and the sacrifices YOU made
to make YOUR idea a huge success....

...you keep no significant rewards for yourself...you give EVERYTHING back,
because to do otherwise would be unethical.


Can you imagine anyone doing anything like that?

Bill Gates is just the name behind Microsoft to me, but what you said on the previous page of him may be mistaken to suggest some of the values (if they can be called that) of Ayn Rand's rather twisted socio-economic philosophy. You probably wouldn't like that if you happen to be poor.

Of course you are correct that being poor doesn't make anyone a better person, in fact it is more commonly the result of being a shitty and particularly ignorant person. It may also be from being too much of a nice, gullible doormat, and then it may be from an overwhelming accumulation of bad luck.

I don't want to say anything racially denigrating, because the situation in Africa has nothing to do with this. It's ultimately geographic conditions which work against African people, ultimately keeping huge populations there held in the chains of socioeconomic desperation, which feeds their ignorance with more ignorance, making them easy prey for those who use them against each other.

To become rich you need to be not necessarily a good person, but a smarter person in most cases, also charisma, ruthlessness, and a general ability to make others fear you will get you far. You can spend your whole life working hard with nothing to show for it, and you really don't need to work that hard to go far. "Hard work" for those at the top invariably translates to working hard at getting other people to take care of it all. It's also helpful to have the advantage of inherited wealth for investment in venture capital, staff salaries and wages, rents and other operational costs.

Finally, that story you told in this post is classic Ayn Rand, and it's a ridiculous non-sequitor. Nobody is expected not to enjoy the fruits of their work at all, and then the corporate culture isn't about working hard at all - it's about the unethical practice of monopolizing markets. Without this, there wouldn't be any American billionaires, but more Americans would be financially well-off, living in a world where true competition drives perfection. When this culture existed is when people were proud of being part of this country, and no such era will ever exist again until such conditions are restored (nationalism today has nothing to feed it other than dangerously moronic militarists). I know there are, and always will be failing business owners who want to sell, but there needs to be some limitations to curb monopolization of markets by the most ruthlessly ambitious buyers.

sure, ok.

I just wanted to clear up that I'm not Bill Gates' apologist or admirer.

And I don't think money is evil, by itself...nor is ambition, in and of itself, necessarily negative.
and I don't think being poor makes you a better person, morally, than wealthy people, right across the board.

I'm ashamed to admit I've never read Ayn Rand...so I didn't realize.

All that was just my own thought process.