The rich and affluent: why hate them?

Dubious claims to match your previous ones. At least you're consistent.



Wow, carted out that tired cliché that without the use of coercion, that a society could not possibly function and would devolve into utter chaos.

You notice the hypocrisy? You create a monopoly on force, violence and theft to protect yourself from force, violence and theft. The same organization that is supposed to protect us from these evils operates based using these same evils against the people it's supposed to protect.

Governments aren’t the only force in the world capable of constructing and maintaining roads, fire departments or other services. I know, that reality drags you out of your comfortable nanny-state womb but, it's the truth.



Wow, really not changing up the game plan. Dragging out yet another tired argument. You take a complex geopolitical issue and simply chalk it up to a trivial cause. This is disingenuous at best, since it marginalized the effects of

Colonialism on the territory

The soviet involvement where in 1977, with the help of Soviet arms, Somalia attempted to seize the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, but was defeated thanks to
Soviet and Cuban backing for Ethiopia, which had turned Marxist,

In 1969, following the assassination of Somalia's second president, Abdirashid Ali Shermarke a coup d’état was led by officers in 1969 and Siad Barre took power in Somalia.

A rebellion which overthrew President Barre in '91.

Western Imperialism such as the U.S government continuing attempts to destabilize the country and even attempts to "Balkanize" it. Why, because we discovered oil in the country and within a couple years we launched Operation Restore Hope in 1992. Much along the same lines of when we discovered oil in Sudan.

There are also the Islamic insurgents who were attempting to establish a haven for radicals such as themselves.

Those are just a few things but, sure, go ahead and simply chalk up a very long and complex issue to a single cause.



Resorting to ad hominem over a common typo? You really didn't have a better argument?



Let me walk you through it.

1). You don't pay you taxes, what happens? You get a letter to pay your taxes.

2). You ignore the letter and continue to refuse to pay your taxes, what happens? You receive a court summons.

3). You ignore the summons, you'll be tried In absentia, you will be found guilty of not paying your taxes and a warrant will be issued for your arrest and possibly given some time to turn yourself in before police search for you.

4). You don't turn yourself in, what happens? Police will arrive to arrest you and place you in jail.

5). If you continue to resist, eventually weapons will be drawn and you will be killed.

Any law, any tax has as it's final enforcement, killing. Any other forms of enforcement such as a fine or restriction of action is itself backed up by killing.

Let me try and rewrite that in a less, well, wrong way:





Allow me to share an anecdote with you. I work for FedEx as a driver. During the holidays I worked a route that was so stressful and labor intensive that it had a negative impact on my health. One day I made a delivery into a set of town homes. On my way in I passed an elderly woman digging in her trunk and I thought nothing of it. On my way back to my van she stopped me and asked if I would assist her in carrying her groceries in.

To put it into perspective, The job was work until you finished, I was always extremely heavy (120+ stops a day), on a stressful and time consuming route that would regularly see me working 14-16 hour long days. I stopped what I was doing and spent several minutes assisting this elderly woman (who needed to use my arm for support) carry her groceries into her home.

It's cliché as all hell but, I helped her because I was compassionate. If more people stopped being lazy and expecting the government to take care of others and instead got off their asses and helped. We'd not only be better societies but, we'd be better people.



I honestly can't believe you're so divorced from reality to think that the laws and taxes you cherish so much aren't backed up by threats of violence. What did you think happens to those tax evaders or those who break the law? The government sits there with their thumbs up their ass, of bloody course not.

It usually always come down to envy. Mostly envy but that's not all of it. People who have it worse than those who are living well and rich almost always criticize the rich and affluent. That's just how human nature works.

I really don't give a damn about rich people. If they worked hard to get rich then they should be able to enjoy it. After all it's their money. My only gripe is when they treat us "commoners" differently for being "lower" than them or because of a different social status. Remember that you got where you are because of us "lower" class people and there is absolutely no difference between any of us except that you have money and I don't. Even a king gets overthrown when he disrespects his people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8

The Rothchilds send there regards

Claiming all wealthy people are evil or selfish would be generalizing. Period. However there are the ones that rule our lives by controlling the money supply, which is the majority of bankers. The folks that own the "Federal Reserve" are the ones to blame. The Federal Reserve is privately owned witch makes it about as federal as my genitalia. In short the government borrows money from the FED with interest and has to pay it back. If all of the money is coming from the FED then paying of the debt owed is impossible. So banks, as stated in Modern Money Mechanics, release this borrowed money to the public, but here is the catch, that money they release isn't actually removed from the banks assets, so in the end the public returns the money back to the back WITH INTEREST. This money stacks on top of the banks previous assets. This way the GOV can pay the FED back. So the fed makes a profit from everything that happens in this country, including war. That's why we participate in so much war. For fucking profit. Don't believe me? America literally uses entire country as slaves. That shirt you got from Old Navvy? Stitched by some poor Columbia kid struggling to survive. Afghanistan? No this is just ridiculous. America used Afghanistan to grow 60% of the worlds Opium supply (heroin). In 2000 the Taliban saw this outrage and burned all of the poppy fields down. I'm sure you've heard 9-11 was an inside job at one point, I'm sorry but it's true. After the "Attack" America had reason to invade Afghanistan. Now more than 80% of the world's heroin supply is grown in Afghanistan. So yes, that day, America killed roughly 3000 of it's own citizens, just to get that Drug money back. The very establishment that has sworn to protect us. This why people all around the world are struggling and dying for some synthetic currency, this is why our environments dying, this is why there will soon be not enough resources to support us and the other JUST AS IMPORTANT life that we share our once great and lush planet with. For profit. This is the truth behind the saying "fuck the system" not fuck the establishment itself, but fuck the repetitive system of doing the same fucking thing over and over again and wondering why the world is dying. People walk outside and wonder "why is it so hot?" and then they get in there dirty little polluting cars and fuck it up even more. This is, in at least my opinion, RETARDED. So to the truly evil rich people FUCK YOU! and fuck the system. But of course they don't care, because they have a lot of money! There lives are just great! Who care about all the other people and animals suffering! We can buy anything our heart desires. This is truly unfair for what my heart desires is peace.

The reason that I hate the nouveau riche is because they just seem to want to get ahead and fuck everybody else, Fuck the country, Fuck everything. They dont want to contribute anything worthwhile and they arnt willing to lead responsibly, They also seem unwilling to make ANY sacrifices themselves and push blame on to others.

They're a divisive smoke and mirrors bunch.

Now real rich aristocrats know how to show leadership qualities, You get your fair share of incompetence with this lot too but sometimes they do have a strange sense of pride and honour which sets them apart from the disgusting nouveau riche.

When you're down there in the trenches you want to know that the man you're standing alongside rich or poor is willing to go over the top with you and the middle class social climbers have always been seen to be generally suspect and unreliable.

Thats why we 'hate' them.

Recently the Daily Show reminded me of why i have a extreme dislike for certain rich people(Bolded it to make it a %100 clear i am not saying this applies to all rich people).

Basically, the big banks paid the credit rating agencies to attach a triple A credit rating on financial deals that they knew were risky. And then these failed deals contributed to the financial crises.

Since then, a proposal was made to make it harder for companies to pay off the people that are rating their deals. But that proposal didn't make it in Congress

So basically big banks and corporations can participate in bribery without any consequences,and now im supposed to feel sorry for them?I know that blame lies with the credit rating agencies too, but nothing forced them to pay those agencies in the first place. These are the kind of rich people i cannot stand. The ones who put the financial security of others at risk without any regard or respect for how their actions can affect other people

The one and only reason I hate the rich is because I myself am not. The power of money is an amazing thing. People say money is not life. But money allows you to do things to enjoy life more. To experience more, money is required. For example, To have a small drinking part with ones friends, Some one has to afford the alcohol. My point is. The rich can afford to live life much better.

Well I for one don't hate rich people at all. I do however find it interesting how many people do hate them, (most of the time for no logical reason). Like hating the people who were born into money. It's not as if they can control that.

I'd like to link this since it practically perfectly fits this topic.


WARNING INCOMING WALL OF TEXT!!!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/DepthHub/comments/1hpk73/uainrialai_explains_left_anarchism/cax2ahg?context=3

Hey mate, you're the one who made a dubious assumption about my educational background. I'm still not exactly sure why, but it's rather disingenuous to fault me for a dubious claim when it was only in response to your dubious assumption. Again, glass houses.



Tell me, if a government isn't going to provide roads, fire services, and the like, who is?

Well, OK, I know the answer in this situation tends to be "private businesses!", so answer me this: how exactly are private businesses supposed to make fire services profitable? Pay a private business a monthly fee or they let your house burn to the ground? Surely there's no way they could use this to extort consumers! People who can't afford to pay the fire brigade don't wouldn't have anything of value to be burnt anyway, right? Right?

And how exactly are they supposed to make roads profitable? It's bad enough when the government sticks them on major motorways; are they going to stick them all over the main roads too? And what incentive is there to build roads to rural areas? Even if they built the roads there, maintaining roads costs a shitload of money; how is a company going to make a profit without sticking toll booths every ten metres, and why shouldn't they just let less-travelled roads fall into disrepair? Moreover, how exactly would competition work? While the obvious answer would be they'd try and have less toll booths than competitors, that isn't really feasible because of the aforementioned maintenance cost, plus the fact that it means drivers would have to take really circuitous routes to minimise the damage to their wallets. Gas is expensive enough as it is; I guess the one upside is that it'd be great incentive to use public transport, but I'm guessing you're not too fond of that either.

I know American libertarians have a special kind of naïveté, but it always baffles me how they expect any of this to work in the real world; the free market isn't some magic cure-all for all the world's problems, as much as some people seem to think it is.



All of that is correct; the situation in Somalia is the result of a lot of factors such as those you mentioned over a long period of time. The reasons for why it's ended up as it has are pretty complex.

That is completely irrelevant however as I said absolutely nothing about the cause; what I was referring to (the fact that Somalia has no real functioning government) is the effect of all of the factors you mentioned, and more . I am not disputing the causes, so as tired as my point may be, you sure did a great job of sidestepping it.



First of all, if you'd seriously avoid paying taxes to such an extent that you would choose death over paying them, you should probably see a psychiatrist, because I'm pretty sure that's unhealthy. I mean, sure, nobody likes paying taxes, but come on.

Secondly, if I'm understanding your point correctly... you're saying we shouldn't have laws? We should exist in a state of nature as described by Hobbes?

I'm hoping I'm just wildly misinterpreting you here, so if I am please correct me.




I agree. In a perfect world, there would be no need for the government to force people to help others through social programmes; people would simply help each other out of the goodness of their hearts, without the government needing to step in at all.

Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world, and the fact is that there are not enough charitable people and organisations to help all the world's people in need. If there were, government programmes wouldn't be necessary to begin with. While there may not be any joy in being forced to help people less fortunate than you and I through taxes, I would rather that than those people not being helped at all.



That was very good of you. If there were more gestures of kindness from more people, the world would be a better place.

(I know we haven't exactly been polite to each other, so I just want to clarify that I am being completely sincere here)




Of course I don't expect them to do nothing, when you break the law, you suffer consequences. You live in society and thus are expected to abide by society's laws; if this is not appealing to you, you're more than welcome to live as a hermit in the wilderness or something.

Money's like strength; it can't get you everything, but there's a lot you can't get without it.

Your assumption is close but, not quite correct. For organizations such as police and fire services I believe volunteers will be perfectly suited to the task. The area I work for my route is 80% volunteer fire departments and 20% government operated fire departments. In other words I believe the "private sector" (which includes more than just businesses) would suffice and promote more of a solidarity within the community. This could be anything from a non-profit volunteer organization, to a communal program, contracting or even the use of a business.

I like how you immediately assume the worst of human nature and yet, promote government as if by simply being government it somehow absolves people of their worst behaviors.

If people can't be trusted, why do you trust them with governmental authority?



Florida, New jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, California, Oklahoma and a few others already have a large number of toll roads. Florida is particularly bad around central Florida (Orlando) where every major route is a minefield of toll booths. Also, considering you're not from the U.S. you may not know this but, every time a person buys a gallon of Petrol or Diesel they are paying a tax which is used to pay for the construction and maintenance of the roads. So in effect, the government already has tens of thousands of toll booths along every stretch of road in the country, they're just in the shape of gas stations.

Though, this tax/toll is levied onto people who do not use the petrol or diesel in their vehicles (lawn mowers, generators, etc).



Paved roads are indeed expensive but, not every road needs to be paved. I have stretches of my route that are unpaved and are either dirt roads or simple gravel roads.



In some areas, like roads, where government has had control for a very long time, we often can’t imagine good free market solutions. We fall into the trap of “I can’t think of how the market would solve this, which must mean that the market *can’t* solve this.” Rather arrogant of us, eh, to think that we know what the market can and cannot do?

The market, of course, is more imaginative than we can ever be, since it is a composite of many minds, not just ours. The market has a great deal to “say” about roads, since most of them were private in the early days of the United States.

Yes, there were some toll roads back then, just as there would undoubtedly be today. However, most roads were built and maintained by those who lived beside them. The businesses, homes, and farms built them for their own use and that of their customers or visitors, dividing the cost between themselves. In a libertarian society, I suspect that most business highways would operate this way too. Why scare away customers with a toll?

In St. Louis, neighborhoods are taking back their roads. Over 1,000 streets have been deeded back to separate neighborhood associations which are formed for that purpose. Those living on the road charge visitors nothing, but do restrict travel by closing off the street or expelling vagrants. Needless to say, crime is much lower on these private streets. Condo communities operate similarly except that their roads are built privately and remain private.

The market seems to prefer “free” access to neighborhood roads and commercial highways, with costs borne by those living beside it. Most likely toll roads would be the choice for longer distances. Not only does this get rid of the monopoly problem, but it gets rid of the needed for stickers, electronic mileage trackers, etc. The market seems to have a better solution than libertarian futurists (myself included) would have predicted.

How is the market solution different from tax assessments for the roads built in front of our houses today? It’s truly optional! One neighbor might say, “I don’t want to pave our dirt road — I only use it once a month to get groceries. If those of you who use it twice a day want to pave it, go ahead, but don’t expect me to pay for it!” The neighbors will either 1) carry this neighbor as a free rider; 2) ask him to pitch in a smaller amount; 3) come to some other agreement. Because they are all neighbors, each has some incentive to be a little more giving in the negotiations than they might with strangers.




I know, European Statists have a special kind of naïveté, but it always baffles me how they expect any of this to work in the real world; the government isn't some magic cure-all for all the world's problems, as much as some people seem to think it is.



The point was, that you have a gun to your head when it comes to taxes. It's not voluntary, you don't have a choice in the matter (well you do but, it's a piss poor choice that doesn't really count). You don't want to pay for that blokes 27th brat that'll end up being a dim-witted Luddite who leeches of public services? Well too bad, cough up the quid or the bobbies will bash your skull in.



I didn't state where laws should come into affect. For a libertarian society, laws exist to protect the rights of an individual. A cornerstone of libertarian thought is the idea of property rights and that a person owns themselves. So all acts we consider universally illegal (Murder, rape, larceny, fraud, etc) can be argued as violations of the victims property rights.

Even Anarchists believe in "laws" in some form or another. If you want the Anarchist take on how society would work, I suggest you read some Kropotkin.




Until the creation of certain government programs, there were a lot more charitable organizations in the U.S but, the number dropped significantly when people start being lazy and kicking the can to the government. Why should I donate to a soup kitchen? The government gives needy people food stamps already. So on and so on. People also used to save more for their retirement before the creation of Social Security.

Government gives us an excuse to be lazy because we'll simply assume someone else will fix the problem.




You can always leave.

I don't hate people for their wealth, i hate them for their actions, words and stupidity. so if someone in a ferrari ran a police officers foot over i would consider them a douche(if it was on purpose), not because of their wealth but because they ran someones foot over with their car(must hurt a lot).

As a communist I believe the weathly aquired their wealth through exploiting the workers. Because of this I very much dislike the affluent