RE: UK to leave EU
June 27, 2016 at 11:55 pm
(This post was last modified: June 28, 2016 at 12:19 am by Edwardo Piet.
Edit Reason: Edited because I was morally evil by saying "they're" when I meant "their".
)
(June 27, 2016 at 4:46 pm)abaris Wrote:(June 27, 2016 at 4:43 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Yup. It really is Brexshit.
But in the case of billionaires my sympathies are limited. It's the working people and their savings I'm concerned over. Billionaires bet in the international gambling halls against the rest of us. So, though luck, if they lose.
Me too generally speaking...
But of course even someone like Bill Gates who everyone hates has given so very very very money to charity that morally speaking (as a consequentalist) he has done a fuck ton of good in the world.
It's the poor I am concerned about, not the rich. But it is the case that some rich people are philanthropists who do a lot of good in the world even if they're utter utter dicks and their intentions are shitty.
Money has power to both harm and help... and sometimes that power can help even if done purely for selfish reasons.
If a super duper mega rich billionaire donates a bunch of money merely to make themselves look good and they don't actually give a shit about all the people they are helping with their philanthropy... I am still nevertheless super glad that they donated the money and I'll gladly take their dickish reasons for doing it if it helps save some lives of the less fortunate.
It's very common for even non-philanthropists to do some donating to charity so people don't call them selfish bastards... even if the only reason they're doing it is so people don't think they're selfish bastards.... and the richer the person the bigger the donations.
So I guess I generally think anyone losing money is all things being equal a bad thing. Any money being lost is a bad thing by default because money has the power to help the less fortunate... it's only when I know that the rich people in question do more harm than good with their money that I consider it a good thing that they lost their money.
Not saying you think that, and I would obviously agree that the less fortunate losing money is worst of all... after all I only care about the rich losing money when they potentially could have helped the poor.... I'm just trying to make a point that by default I consider any loss of money bad because it's a loss of power to help, not just a loss of power to harm.
Just saying it works both ways.
I know I have rambled and been repetitive in this post... I just struggle to make my point clear and be thorough without being rambley and repetitive. Sorry anyway though if I have come across completely the wrong way.
I hope it goes without saying that ultimately it's only those who are unfortunate that I care about financially speaking and I only really care for the finances of the fortunate when it has an at least possibly potential impact on the unfortunate.
Have I been clear? Have I made sense?
