Mo Money, Mo Problems [Archive] - Beastie Boys Message Board

mickill

08-10-2005, 08:08 AM

Do you think that the wealthy have a moral obligation to help the unfortunate? How much money is too much money?

According to a study that was conducted a little while ago, that I read about somewhere and just kept in the back of my mind, no more than 212 of the worlds richest people control 50% of the wealth on the planet. The same study also determined that the cost of providing the basic necessities--food, clothing and shelter--as well as healthcare and education, to the entire population of the world would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 80 billion dollars annually. That figure works out to approximately 4% of the combined annual earnings of the 212 richest people in the world.

Think about it; Warren Buffet, Gates, the Waltons, these people make your entire yearly income in less than a second. Do you realize that in 2004 Bill Gates actually made money at rates as high as $500,000 per minute? Granted, he does donate a considerable amount to charity.

guerillaGardner

08-10-2005, 08:17 AM

I think that if richer nations have influenced events that cause unfairness and instability in poorer nations then the richer nations have a moral responsibility to help - either that or stop causing the problems in the first place.

On a more personal level, people could spend their money a whole lot better at times. If people spend their money on sandwich toasters and juicers that never get used, on DVDs that they'll watch twice and on bicycles that will sit gathering dust in cupboards then wouldn't they be better just handing that cash over to someone who can use it for stuff the really, really need.

If I had the money to spend on a £20,000 car, for example. I'd rather buy a £10,000 car and give the rest to charity than spend double on more than I need.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 08:19 AM

If I had the money to spend on a £20,000 car, for example. I'd rather buy a £10,000 car and give the rest to charity than spend double on more than I need.

no you wouldn't.

Bob

08-10-2005, 08:26 AM

they don't want to and don't have to, therefore they don't

i don't know what i'd do if i got that rich. i'd like to think i'd do the right thing and spread it around, but i don't know.

Nuzzolese

08-10-2005, 08:30 AM

I imagine Paris Hilton is doing the most sensible thing anyone can do with limitless wealth. It's an absurd life situation to be in, so acting the clown seems fitting. Course she's not responsible for her wealth. If I had to work for it I imagine I'd grow bitter and greedy like Scrooge McDuck. Using cartoons as examples, this is telling of how much I understand about making money.

bigblu89

08-10-2005, 08:38 AM

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 08:52 AM

If I had to work for it I imagine I'd grow bitter and greedy like Scrooge McDuck. Using cartoons as examples, this is telling of how much I understand about making money.

hahaahaha...

First, it is impracticle to EXPECT wealthy people to part with large amounts of thier money purely for altruistic reasons (pure charity). There are usually other things at play there...such as tax breaks (that's a BIG part of it), public relations, or even more devious reasons.

and hand-outs..in and of themselves...aren't usaully benificial.
well, for disaster relief or extreme famine...i can certainly see it. particularly because it builds the bonds of reciprication: i will help you in times of dire consequence...you will do the same for me, right?
it also shines a positive light on the contributor.

but handouts purely to promote equality...are irresponsible. and do more harm than good anyway. we all know the "give a fish/teach to fish" proverb.

we should give and build for *equal oppurtunity*, but not for total equality.
not all people are equal...and not all have equal ability. that's just nature.

going back to why the rich (or anyone) donates money.
the best way we can promote donations or investments of that nature apart from tax breaks and PR...is to educate on how helping to build a better society DOES help them in the long term. Cutting crime, promoting education....these things can actually come back to helping a wealthy mans bottom line.

Also, educate the masses on social responisibility and reciprocity.
no one gets rich on thier own. for every rich man, there are thousands of others that help him get there in one way or another.
not to mention the gov't and economic system in place that allowed for such industrious enterprise.
companies should be proud to give taxes, and feel it appropriate....and not hide them in off shore accounts.
you got rich thanks to the country you live and the system it supports. give back and support the system that supports you...don't leech.
and give back and support the society that you were and still are a part of...that helped you get to were you are today.

cj hood

08-10-2005, 09:03 AM

if mike d could just give me $100K we'd be straight...

ms.peachy

08-10-2005, 09:21 AM

I didn't get that the question was all about 'donating'. I thought it was 'helping', of which donation is only one possibility.

Kid Presentable

08-10-2005, 09:49 AM

You could only hope to understand poverty if you were incredibly wealthy. From that, perhaps some sort of charity may be borne. Wealth being as individual as those who possess it, I feel that may be a tad idealistic.

TurdBerglar

08-10-2005, 10:02 AM

i've always had this problem with the super rich hoarding money. everyone deseerves a nice house in the suburbs but nobody needs to be a fuckn' billionaire. spread the wealth.

Kid Presentable

08-10-2005, 10:07 AM

i've always had this problem with the super rich hoarding money. everyone deseerves a nice house in the suburbs but nobody needs to be a fuckn' billionaire. spread the wealth.

Yeah, but if you worked really hard, or were motivated by very personal reasons, then realistically you'd expect everybody to have the same capabilities. You may even begin to believe that anybody is able to achieve material success.

It would be like being called 'Lucky' when you'd shovelled shit for years, and done all you could for what you have. And if your children be penalised for that, then surely white folks should be penalised for what their forefathers perpetrated.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 10:29 AM

everyone deseerves a nice house in the suburbs

says who?

Bob

08-10-2005, 10:48 AM

everyone deserves a nice house in the suburbs

there, i said it, now it's been said by someone

Kid Presentable

08-10-2005, 10:51 AM

everyone deserves a nice house in the suburbs

there, i said it, now it's been said by someone

Now Q can say: "One dude on the internet said it. Once. Shit, man, Get a grip motherfucker, this ain't back in the days. But you don't hear me though."

beastieangel01

08-10-2005, 10:57 AM

Hmm. I am not really sure if they are obligated to. I know that I think they should... but that doesn't really mean anything.

I hope that if I were ever to become rich one day (haha, yeah right, but for the sake of the topic), that I hope I spread it around. I remember this topic coming up once before with the bf, and I told him to smack me around if I don't start helping people if I were to have lots of money one day.

adam_f

08-10-2005, 11:05 AM

I'd let all the poor people work for me in exchange for Fig Newtons.

ms.peachy

08-10-2005, 11:07 AM

Now Q can say: "One dude on the internet said it. Once. Shit, man, Get a grip motherfucker, this ain't back in the days. But you don't hear me though."
Q doesn't really 'hold these truths to be self evident'.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 11:23 AM

Q doesn't really 'hold these truths to be self evident'.
you got that right, sister.

cosmo105

08-10-2005, 11:53 AM

i read somewhere recently that Bill Gates announced he's donating 95% of his wealth to charity (which would still leave him and his family with a more than comfortable amount on which to live). i can't find a link for it though. can anyone else confirm this?

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 01:43 PM

cosmo105

08-10-2005, 01:44 PM

unconfirm?

no seriously. i read this in a reputable source but i can't remember where.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 01:54 PM

no seriously. i read this in a reputable source but i can't remember where.

god, that is SOOOOO internet.

cosmo105

08-10-2005, 01:57 PM

he's always been one of the most charitable people on the planet - he donates more than anyone else. so i wouldn't doubt it.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 02:04 PM

he's always been one of the most charitable people on the planet - he donates more than anyone else. so i wouldn't doubt it.

well, i don't want to totally knock that...

but you are aware of the massive tax breaks he recieves for charity donations, right?

beastieangel01

08-10-2005, 02:05 PM

but you are aware of the massive tax breaks he recieves for charity donations, right?

although the tax breaks could be the motivation, at least people are getting helped in the process right? vs no money being donated at all.

cosmo105

08-10-2005, 02:06 PM

i love my xbox.

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 02:13 PM

although the tax breaks could be the motivation, at least people are getting helped in the process right? vs no money being donated at all.

yeah.

though i always thought it was kinda slimey how all of his computer/software donations to schools were (of course) Windows products.

like a tobacco company giving kids free cigarrettes to ensure future customers.

beastieangel01

08-10-2005, 03:03 PM

*being helped/getting help.

anyways, having windows on the computers is kinda iffy. But I guess it would be weird to give computers with windows on it, like he thinks his product isn't good enough or something.

Nuzzolese

08-10-2005, 03:15 PM

yeah.

though i always thought it was kinda slimey how all of his computer/software donations to schools were (of course) Windows products.

like a tobacco company giving kids free cigarrettes to ensure future customers.

Windows is hardly an addictive carcinogen

is it? :eek:

Qdrop

08-10-2005, 03:21 PM

Windows is hardly an addictive carcinogen

is it? :eek:

time will tell.

Nuzzolese

08-10-2005, 03:26 PM

You're right! omgnewthread

mickill

08-11-2005, 01:30 AM

I didn't get that the question was all about 'donating'. I thought it was 'helping', of which donation is only one possibility.
Yeah, I meant help, but I guess that donating is the most common form of help. I guess i just mean, should the wealthy feel obligated to make these changes happen? Everybody knows that there are severe imparities between the various social classes, nations, races etc. And knowing that the resources are there to aid people that are basically without the necessities to really survive or provide for their families, should more pressure be put on those with the excess dough? I'd like to think that most people genuinely would want to help, but that's not usually the case.

zippo

08-11-2005, 02:01 AM

Yeah, but if you worked really hard, or were motivated by very personal reasons, then realistically you'd expect everybody to have the same capabilities. You may even begin to believe that anybody is able to achieve material success.

what? what are you talking about? youre speaking as if we all start the race from the same spot? i know this is just a fkin message board but at least think about what youre saying before you post it man. if we all are motivated by very personal reasons, like for example say, the need to survive, which we all share, there is obviously still no way that everyone would have the same chance of "achieving material success" when before going to school, getting a job, getting a house, a car or a pair of shoes, some people have gotta use that income to feed their family and themselves and will never get past that limit cuz it will never fully be covered. so, how is this person able to achieve material sucess as much as his or her middle or high class "equal" is?

and "if you worked really hard"?....alright forget it, i should just stop.

ms.peachy

08-11-2005, 02:48 AM

Yeah, I meant help, but I guess that donating is the most common form of help. I guess i just mean, should the wealthy feel obligated to make these changes happen? Everybody knows that there are severe imparities between the various social classes, nations, races etc. And knowing that the resources are there to aid people that are basically without the necessities to really survive or provide for their families, should more pressure be put on those with the excess dough? I'd like to think that most people genuinely would want to help, but that's not usually the case.
For me I just don't see it as, the rich should help the poor. Just that people should help people, out of a sense of common humanity. Lovely thought, I know. Of course not everyone will subscribe to it. But I don't know that you can 'force' people to. In theory, that's what taxes do in part - you earn more, you pay more, but of course it doesn't always work that way either.

Medellia

08-11-2005, 03:59 AM

i would think common sense could unconfirm that.
Whatcos was probably talking about was Gatesies' will. The kiddies will get "only" 10 mil apiece. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/colyrmn/yrmn081.htm)

I'm sure there is a better article about it than that, but it was the first one I saw on a fairly reputable site (ie. not a blog) and I'm a bit too tired to dig any further than that.

Kid Presentable

08-11-2005, 05:55 AM

what? what are you talking about? youre speaking as if we all start the race from the same spot? i know this is just a fkin message board but at least think about what youre saying before you post it man. if we all are motivated by very personal reasons, like for example say, the need to survive, which we all share, there is obviously still no way that everyone would have the same chance of "achieving material success" when before going to school, getting a job, getting a house, a car or a pair of shoes, some people have gotta use that income to feed their family and themselves and will never get past that limit cuz it will never fully be covered. so, how is this person able to achieve material sucess as much as his or her middle or high class "equal" is?

and "if you worked really hard"?....alright forget it, i should just stop.

I know there are people who think this way. Think before you reply to a post, I never said I feel this way.

Just trying to add balance, emo.

zorra_chiflada

08-11-2005, 07:09 AM

Do you think that the wealthy have a moral obligation to help the unfortunate? How much money is too much money?

i can't understand anyone who thinks wealth should not be spread.
i can't understand anyone who thinks all extremely wealthy people deserve the money they have, and think they've earnt it.
kid presentable gave some good answers from a wealthy person's perspective, but why the fuck would a middle class person think that the very wealthy deserve to keep all of their money?

Rancid_Beasties

08-11-2005, 07:42 AM

I actually think that people with as much money as (in Australia) Kerry Packer, who do a rather insignificant amount of charity, actually have mental issues. If you are so motivated by money, that concerned about ensuring your legacy and the financial security of your family for the next 200 years, so consumed by your work and making more and more money, you really have problems. I think I'd rather be lower middle class for the rest of my life and have a conscience, than be even moderately wealthy and completely ignorant of those less fortunate than myself.

I think that there is a certain limit of wealth that no person needs. If your income exceeds 1 million dollars australian per year, or if you have more than 10 million in assets, and you are not contributing a significant amount to help others without motivation from tax breaks, you really have no morality as I see it. That, or you are a complete ignorant fucker who doesnt deserve the money anyway!!

Qdrop

08-11-2005, 07:50 AM

i can't understand anyone who thinks wealth should not be spread.
i can't understand anyone who thinks all extremely wealthy people deserve the money they have, and think they've earnt it.
kid presentable gave some good answers from a wealthy person's perspective, but why the fuck would a middle class person think that the very wealthy deserve to keep all of their money?

because it's thievery.

how does stealing from the rich (immoral) make us a better society?

and why would anyone want to put effort into accumulating wealth when it will be taken from them and spread around?

true, many rich inherit thier money...but down the line, someone earned it...and they can do what they want with it- including send it down the generational line to thier kids and so forth.
who are we to steal from them?

are you from the school of thought that all great wealth is made unethically?
that it is all accumulated on the bleeding backs of the labor force?
that can be the only reason i can see for you stating "why the fuck would a middle class person think that the very wealthy deserve to keep all of their money?"
you must be assuming great wealth is immorral?

again, just like your boyfriend and other socialists-- you base all of your beliefs on the idea that all people are equal and all should get an equal share of everything...no more no less. you think that motivation will rely on the human spirit and reciprocity...right?
as opposed to personal gain and greed?

see, i can meet socialist half way....mostly for economic reasons though.
i do beleive there should be reasonable caps on industrial and corporate wealth....to ensure the survival of competition.
i am against the practice of corporations buying out numerous other corporations...creating giant conglomerates.

zorra_chiflada

08-11-2005, 07:58 AM

are you from the school of thought that all great wealth is made unethically?
that it is all accumulated on the bleeding backs of the labor force?
that can be the only reason i can see for you stating "why the fuck would a middle class person think that the very wealthy deserve to keep all of their money?"

uh, yeah, it is. how do you think products are made?

Qdrop

08-11-2005, 08:06 AM

uh, yeah, it is. how do you think products are made?
i guess it's opinion vs. opinion.

true, without the labor...there is no product.

but without a manager, capital, and executive inginuity....there is nothing for the labor to do.

the labor at my factory do 99% of the physical work for our company.
they do 1% of the business planning.

the labor could be replaced without too much difficulty.
the executive could be replaced with much greater difficulty.

anyone can labor.
few can plan, organize, and lead.

the leaders deserve more money for thier efforts.
they don't deserve to be told that they are no better then the labor.

accumulation of wealth is not always evil.
it is natural.
it is necessary.

zippo

08-11-2005, 04:02 PM

I know there are people who think this way. Think before you reply to a post, I never said I feel this way.

Just trying to add balance, emo.

you never said you feel this way in your post? actually, there was absolutely nothing in your post that stated that it wasnt how you felt...i...honestly cant believe youre trying to say that. i am glad though, that you´re not the one that feels that way and that its others.

and "emo"? no, its just that i live in a very poor 3rd world country and the poor are very present in everyday life here, not just in a thread conversation as it just is for some of these people. I go to an internationally respected college and live in a modern and comfortable apartment, but everyday on my way to class I pass by underveloped parts of the city, and on the way back in the bus, people with nothing to eat come on it and play music from instruments made out of combs and whatever they can find so they can get tips from passengers. theres not one bus ride, walk or day where i (and every citizen) dont interact through some form with the underprivlieged classes, and that affects you obviously, so when you read certain things that arent true you feel the obligation to defend them.

HEIRESS

08-11-2005, 04:26 PM

I basically tunneled under a fence to get into a charity concert for free on friday

Im not rich, at all, so can my behavior be atleast demi-forgiven??

Kid Presentable

08-11-2005, 07:00 PM

and "emo"? no, its just that i live in a very poor 3rd world country and the poor are very present in everyday life here, not just in a thread conversation as it just is for some of these people. I go to an internationally respected college and live in a modern and comfortable apartment, but everyday on my way to class I pass by underveloped parts of the city, and on the way back in the bus, people with nothing to eat come on it and play music from instruments made out of combs and whatever they can find so they can get tips from passengers. theres not one bus ride, walk or day where i (and every citizen) dont interact through some form with the underprivlieged classes, and that affects you obviously, so when you read certain things that arent true you feel the obligation to defend them.

My Bad, it was supposed to read 'elmo'.
:o