Chat Thread

UraSatVen1029

Well-known member
I’m not talking about his generosity.

I’m talking about the fact that he built Microsoft. That’s what makes him way better than mother Teresa.

There are so many ways you can help the society. Both Bill Gates and Mother Teresa responded to their calling and used their own innate gifts. Gates is a brilliant innovative person, Teresa is a remarkable humanitarian. I want to say that no one is better than the other, but we all have different views and opinions...
 

UraSatVen1029

Well-known member
But of course, you can't deny that Mircosoft has made ground-breaking impacts on us as we are continuously moving forward to this era of technology.
 

UraSatVen1029

Well-known member
I don’t mind people being helpful but it’s when they want to control me and it’s not about helping. It stresses me out I actually end up making mistakes (thinking of an old boss lol)

You can get people who are helpful who don’t want to control you and thats much better and less selfish I think

Oh, I see.

Well, I'm annoying; I actually want to be helpful because I'll end up feeling insecure if I'm useless and all. It's like my security and ego is somehow tied to how "useful" I can be. Lol. Not really proud of it. So sometimes I end up manipulating someone to get me to do tasks, no matter how big or small.
 

Ukpoohbear

Well-known member
So sometimes I end up manipulating someone to get me to do tasks, no matter how big or small.

That's so funny! I can just imagine you saying to someone 'don't you hate dirty carpets? I could hoover if someone asked me to!' :whistling:

Its nice you like being helpful that is a nice quality. I do feel guilty if I don't offer to help if the housework is happening but I don't have the thing where I need to feel helpful to be needed.

If someone tells me what they need me to do then I will listen and do it but not when they think they need to boss me etc. I don't know its hard to explain but I can tell a controlling person straight off and I know they are going to give me anxiety at some point
 

UraSatVen1029

Well-known member
That's so funny! I can just imagine you saying to someone 'don't you hate dirty carpets? I could hoover if someone asked me to!' :whistling:

Its nice you like being helpful that is a nice quality. I do feel guilty if I don't offer to help if the housework is happening but I don't have the thing where I need to feel helpful to be needed.

If someone tells me what they need me to do then I will listen and do it but not when they think they need to boss me etc. I don't know its hard to explain but I can tell a controlling person straight off and I know they are going to give me anxiety at some point

Pfft. Hahaha.

Okay yeah maybe.

It made people push me away, because I can just walk up to you with big hopeful eyes and invade your personal space saying "I'm right here, I can totally help you." And I'm not exaggerating. I did this so often when I was so much younger. Ew. I would be so hurt if no one asked me to help or contribute in a group or a team. Then I'll start thinking, "there must be something wrong with me. I'm worthless." Yeah, it can be seen as a nice quality, but if you're insecure like me... nope. Nevermind.

Now I control myself not to act too aggressive with it. I'll wait for the right time and the right opportunity lol.

Actually, how you described it... that sounds like a bossy person plain and simple. Or a controlling one. Not really a helper type.
 

AppLeo

Well-known member
There are so many ways you can help the society. Both Bill Gates and Mother Teresa responded to their calling and used their own innate gifts. Gates is a brilliant innovative person, Teresa is a remarkable humanitarian. I want to say that no one is better than the other, but we all have different views and opinions...

Yeah, but I’m trying to make a point that charity and generosity doesn’t do nearly a good a job at pulling people out of poverty than a businessman.

I am better than you then because I have contributed more tax credits than your bus boy waiter job :whistling:

Taxes don’t really help anyone.
 

Ukpoohbear

Well-known member
Pfft. Hahaha.

Okay yeah maybe.

It made people push me away, because I can just walk up to you with big hopeful eyes and invade your personal space saying "I'm right here, I can totally help you." And I'm not exaggerating. I did this so often when I was so much younger. Ew. I would be so hurt if no one asked me to help or contribute in a group or a team. Then I'll start thinking, "there must be something wrong with me. I'm worthless." Yeah, it can be seen as a nice quality, but if you're insecure like me... nope. Nevermind.

Now I control myself not to act too aggressive with it. I'll wait for the right time and the right opportunity lol.

Actually, how you described it... that sounds like a bossy person plain and simple. Or a controlling one. Not really a helper type.

Aw well someone with genuine helpful eyes would not make me feel like someone was controlling me. People help for different reasons either for ego or control but of course there are genuine helpers too.

The part where you said you have invaded space before with big helpful eyes reminds me of how I met this friend. If she did not do that we would not have been friends because I wouldn’t go up to people so it’s good you are like that.

Offering to help is better than rolling your eyes when someone is struggling! Its just a shame it hurt you when others say no but I suppose you will get used to that and take it less personally more and more. Sometimes when I have bad anxiety and someone offers to help they are an angel!
 
Last edited:

Boston Guy

Well-known member
Taxes don’t really help anyone.

I'm surprised at how anti-charity you seem. I'm just about as fiscally conservative as one can be wothout being on the fringe. One of the tenets of being fiscally conservative is leaving financial benevolence to private parties; not the state with tax dollars going into welfare.

I don't see the use in being opposed to taxes and to charity. Just asking for the rabble to vote in a socialist.

Charity is necessary in fostering a capable society. Naturally without ot, the dregs of society would surely be legion. Charity gives an organic safety net (or better yet, trampoline) from which one might be able to bounce back.

The upper-classes should feel an innate duty to engage in philanthropy; the rich man's burden, perhaps.
 

Ukpoohbear

Well-known member
Yeah, but I’m trying to make a point that charity and generosity doesn’t do nearly a good a job at pulling people out of poverty than a businessman.



Taxes don’t really help anyone.

You also agree that poor people need more opportunity to be successful but greed stops that from happening.

Some rich children will not be as talented as some poor children and people are selfish about wanting to stay on top of the triangle so will protect their assets and don't care if poor miss opportunities.

So capitalism is not forced altruism it is just illegal to starve them because there would be a revolution.
 
Last edited:

AppLeo

Well-known member
I'm surprised at how anti-charity you seem. I'm just about as fiscally conservative as one can be wothout being on the fringe. One of the tenets of being fiscally conservative is leaving financial benevolence to private parties; not the state with tax dollars going into welfare.

Charity isn’t needed. Only free markets and productive people.

I don't see the use in being opposed to taxes and to charity. Just asking for the rabble to vote in a socialist.

They vote socialist because they’re immoral and corrupt.

Charity is necessary in fostering a capable society. Naturally without ot, the dregs of society would surely be legion. Charity gives an organic safety net (or better yet, trampoline) from which one might be able to bounce back.

Charity seems to prolong to the inevitable. It doesn’t make anything better. It doesn’t pull people out of poverty. It rewards them for being useless.

The upper-classes should feel an innate duty to engage in philanthropy; the rich man's burden, perhaps.

No they shouldn’t. They’ve already done their part. The poor should have an inmate duty to help themselves; not turn to other people for help. We’ve spent so much money to help Africa, yet they are still poor. Charity doesn’t solve the problem, it’s just a shitty band-aid.

You also agree that poor people need more opportunity to be successful but greed stops that from happening.

Some rich children will not be as talented as some poor children and people are selfish about wanting to stay on top of the triangle so will protect their assets and don't care if poor miss opportunities.

So capitalism is not forced altruism it is just illegal to starve them because there would be a revolution.

It is forced altruism. In order for someone to buy my product, they have to give me money. We both trade value. No one is getting taken advantage of. People who are forced to give money without anything in return is not fair or just.
 

Ukpoohbear

Well-known member
Poor people are trapped by Capitalism because Capitalism has the power of what to sell the goods for the poor people need

Why is there gun crime? Because somebody sold lots of guns to make money.

Why is there robbery? Because of unemployment.

Why are people addicted to drugs? Because of the 1% manufacturing it to make profit.

And btw Africa is in debt because of loans the Western world gave it. Africa was not born in debt it was made it by economy.

And what is the economy but a made up word invented by Capitalism?

The world is in debt because only so much money has been printed so more people need it.

Why not just print more money?

Why build chain after chain of supermarkets with fixed high prices the poor cant afford so they settle for cheap food with poison in it because some manufacturing boss wants to make the most profit.
 
Last edited:

AppLeo

Well-known member
No....

It’s because of markets people actually have something to buy. If there was no capitalism, people would starve or have to make their own food.

The reason why we can go to the store and buy food in abundance is because a businessman worked with other businessmen to grow the food, and put the food in a store, and do it efficiently enough to sell at a lower price.
 

Ukpoohbear

Well-known member
No....

It’s because of markets people actually have something to buy. If there was no capitalism, people would starve or have to make their own food.

The reason why we can go to the store and buy food in abundance is because a businessman worked with other businessmen to grow the food, and put the food in a store, and do it efficiently enough to sell at a lower price.

Markets are a place to buy and sell there is nothing wrong with that idea.

Its greed (Capitalism) that makes it unfair and guess what that breeds (poor people).
 

Boston Guy

Well-known member
Charity isn’t needed. Only free markets and productive people.

Then you clearly know more and better than those like Bill Gates who you have already cited for his success. In truth, charity is necessary for the reasons I have mentioned, but perhaps most importantly, to alleviate the burden on the tax payer. It would be, frankly, ridiculous to assume that one can be a part of a society that lacks both tax-payer funded welfare, as well as private charitable works. It isn't realistic at all. Learn from the Tsar.

They vote socialist because they’re immoral and corrupt.

Much like children who weren't reared properly, perhaps? So then again you show the need for charity. These wayward children ought to be protected. Wealth has a consequence and expectation of benevolence in this civilized world.

Unless, you mean to say that those in a state of poverty are inherently corrupt and naturally inclined to immorality, in other words: born with those natures? Help me to understand as you do.

Charity seems to prolong to the inevitable. It doesn’t make anything better. It doesn’t pull people out of poverty. It rewards them for being useless.

It isn't enough of a reward to be considered as such. No, there are plenty of examples, all of which are anecdotal and I prefer arguing in theory. The inevitable, might I add, is death; and that is inevitable for rich and poor.

Furthermore the poor who ardently try to better themselves ought to be fostered. If they aren't fostered, I feel that society would suffer as a result. A child has potential to grow, and a pauper has the potential to expand his affluence if privately (not by the state) subsidized by way of charity.

No they shouldn’t. They’ve already done their part. The poor should have an inmate duty to help themselves; not turn to other people for help. We’ve spent so much money to help Africa, yet they are still poor. Charity doesn’t solve the problem, it’s just a shitty band-aid.

You are asking for a tremendous burden on the taxpayer. I'm not entirely sure if this is your intention, but that is the true inevitability. For the record, I'm not talking about charity to Africa, or India, or anywhere else beside the United States. Let the rich of those countries do their bit.

If we follow this logic of yours down the proven path, we'll see crime rise and prison rates rise as a result. Crime = prison = taxpayer money. Or, we see an electorate that is so poor that when some socialist comes along, he just stole an election. Poverty, therefore socialism, therefore tax hikes, therefore tax payer burden.

You are speaking in Utopian contexts that aren't at all realistic. Charity is a necessity in any civilized society. We aren't savages. We have a country and community, we aren't our own little islands.

People who are forced to give money without anything in return is not fair or just.

Like taxes, right? I agree completely. So let's not give people the opportunity to demand higher taxes for welfare and give a little more to the relief fund, eh? Well, I will anyway. I'll enjoy my tax deduction. Cheers! :wink:
 

david starling

Well-known member
Markets are a place to buy and sell there is nothing wrong with that idea.

Its greed (Capitalism) that makes it unfair and guess what that breeds (poor people).

Capitalism is the best this Tropical Age of Capricorn can do, and like the Sign itself, it has its plusses and minuses. Capritalism! Can't live with it, can't live without it! :andy:
 

Rawiri

Well-known member
The "help" the US and various other countries (utlizing IMF etc) provide to Africa and other places isn't genuinely altruistic or really designed to enrich them (maybe publicly that is "the idea").

It creates massive debt and the money is put into infrastructure which allows ready access for various corporations to access resources and a requirement for the countries to allow it as they have debts to pay. Most of it is not "charity" but loan. It's akin to the English plundering large amounts of wealth out of India etc earlier.

So it's not really a good example of charity not helping...since it does what it is meant to do which is expansion of the US empire (not just US, mind you) through economic "hitmanship" and warfare. That kind of warfare became necessary by the time of the cold war...

[/random woowoo]

Carry on.
 

Boston Guy

Well-known member
Poor people are trapped by Capitalism because Capitalism has the power of what to sell the goods for the poor people need

I'd like to ask what kind of system you find to be most agreeable to all people?

Why is there gun crime? Because somebody sold lots of guns to make money.

Gun crime is not always (or even usually) committed by a legal firearm. These tools are procured through black markets or the gun was procured by other criminal means. I'm a gun owner and I like to think of myself as law-abiding.

We need to remember that when legal gun ownership is fostered, crime should not react with inclination, but disinclination. The reason that black markets exist is because of licensing, taxes, and other non-capitalistic means.

Why is there robbery? Because of unemployment.

That is, and I hope you'll excuse me, childish of you to say and dismissive. To tab all robbery to being unemployed? That is too absurd. I'd like you to tell that to the looters during these riots and natural disasters. Are they really doing that because they are unemployed? Really? If they were employed, they wouldn't do that?

The next question is, why is there unemployment? Could it be because capitalism isn't allowed to work and the minimum wages are too high so smaller businesses can't higher more people and expand? Really fires up the neurons.

Why are people addicted to drugs? Because of the 1% manufacturing it to make profit.

Right, cause heroin is definitely made by JP Morgan and Microsoft. Those Financial advisers and their pill-pushing! No, lol. I'm stretching that to the absurd but I'd really like a citation as to why that, of all reasons, is why drug addiction exists; especially when the epidemic seems to be focused on opiates and other illegal substances.

And btw Africa is in debt because of loans the Western world gave it. Africa was not born in debt it was made it by economy.

More often than not, it was not the Western world, but China and the former Soviet Union; especially the Southern parts of Africa. Remember Angola and Mozambique has only been under African rule since the 1970's. Even later for Zimbabwe, and still later for South Africa. The new governments in these countries inherited Western technologies and economies, but because these new governments were not even remotely capitalistic but socialist, they floundered. Don't blame capitalism.

And what is the economy but a made up word invented by Capitalism?

I don't even know what this means. Help me to understand.

Why not just print more money?

Ja! Wilkommen zu Weimar! It hasn't worked out well before, but let's try it again. Back to Africa for a sec, you should research inflation in Zimbabwe, it was really fascinating. They had starving Trillionaires for a time because their dollar wasn't worth anything so everyone had a lot of worthless money. They ended up abolishing their currency like fools and accepting international currencies.

Why build chain after chain of supermarkets with fixed high prices the poor cant afford so they settle for cheap food with poison in it because some manufacturing boss wants to make the most profit.

If corporate taxes, sales taxes, and other state deployed schemes weren't in play, this wouldn't be an issue. You are arguing against capitalism when you ought to argue against the state for being interlopers in peoples wallets.

Cheers! :wink:
 
Top