Diageo Posted March 5, 2012 Posted March 5, 2012 None of those are real barriers to entry. Confidence, skills, knowledge are all things that can be gained. Money? You can start a business with zero capital, yeah it's hard, but can be done. I've done it with my web design. Zero input in terms of money and I haves few clients now. All of which was done on the side while working another job. If they aren't interested then they have absolutely no right to complain. They are all real barriers. We can't have everyone owning a business or else there would be no value to them. Skills and knowledge can be gained, but you need the motivation and money for the education. You need to live in a place with accessible education and facilities. You can't start a business with no money whatsoever. Sure you can start a web design with little money, but you still need the computer and an internet provider, electricity bill etc. Why is the most important thing to make money or be interested in fields that make the most money. What are these people complaining about? Are you attacking a straw man here? What I see is dannyboy defending an article, with the view that your effort does not have a positive linear relationship with income, and that by dismissing others for being poor as solely their own fault is unfair. The world is unfair. Thinking that it is fair and that everyone has the opportunity to become anything they want to be, that is a defence mechanism. An illusion to make you feel less guilty about not helping others, and to feel less fear and anxiety.
MoogleViper Posted March 5, 2012 Posted March 5, 2012 I think a lot of you seem to be misunderstanding the article (or I did). It's not complaining about the rich being rich or the wealth divide or anything like that. It's highlighting how ridiculous it is when rich people say things like "I'm not actually that wealthy" and "I made it so why can't you." Both of which I've heard people say. The latter is the equivalent of looking at sperm and saying "well I fertilised an egg, why can't you?"
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Why isn't everyone capable of setting up their own business? What's stopping them? Everytime I ask the Dragons they tell me they're Out.
The Peeps Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Why isn't everyone capable of setting up their own business? What's stopping them? What do you think would happen if everyone started up their own business? If the entirety of the population decided to work for themselves? Society would fall apart. We'd have no doctors, no nurses, no teachers, no police, no firemen, no janitors, no lawyers, shall I go on? 99.9% of the businesses would fail. Then what?
Daft Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 I think what annoys me the most is that he's obviously painstakingly researched this article for hours to find quotes which match his points perfectly and make them all seem like assholes. All the rich people I know acknowledge they're incredibly lucky, whether it's being in the right place at the right time or being born into a wealthy family. They could do exactly that if they wanted to. There's nothing stopping them putting a business plan together to get some funding from the bank. What's stopping them doing that is an entrepreneurial spirit; there might be too much risk etc. For every successful entrepreneur I'm betting there's at least 10 failed ones. To make money you have to take risks. You could argue that going to Uni is taking a risk. You're investing X amount and spending 3 or 4 years of your life learning about something which has no guarantees of a job at the end of it. Going to uni is a risk that a lot of people take. What utter bullshit.
chairdriver Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 I kinda can't deal with quasi-anticapitalist critique right now which demonises rich people and does nothing else. Of course you're going to have rich people being cunts, that's how the class system operates. It's all systemic.
Daft Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Who are these 'rich people' you're talking about? There's no point criticizing one generalization with another.
Cube Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Based on that article I now firmly believe that any rich person who doesn't dress up in costume and fight crime with cool gadgets should be shot on sight.
Jonnas Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 So, I'm guessing this is a thrip from the "Good Stuff" thread? The best points have already been made. The article isn't attacking or defending the wealthy, or the rich, or the hard-working, or the 1%, or the 99%. It's calling out bullshit arguments for what they are. They're not only untrue and inaccurate, they're insulting. They imply that poor people are poor because they're lazy or incompetent. They imply that the speaker works harder than a billion others. I know I'm repeating already-said arguments, but still.
Pit-Jr Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 You can't be rich without screwing over people. Lots and lots of people
The Bard Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 (edited) What's stopping them? Some of you are foolishly falling prey to a classic psychological trait of people who don't know better. It's called Fundamental Attribution Error; the fact that when we see someone who has become successful, wealthy or famous, we attribute this gain and all the advantages it brings, to the successes of their personality, or their ability to work hard. In essence we laud them, in totality, for everything that they've become while what we neglect to look at, is that any given person's input is meaningless without the material and environmental means to propel them. Not only that, but the fact that it is these very material conditions that create them in the first place. Would a Rockefeller or a J.P Morgan been possible without the availability of crude oil and steel, its innovative new uses, and a hole in the market? No. The same goes for any entrepreneur. Sure, you could start a business, but unless, by some serendipitous miracle, you find an unoccupied niche in the market, you're going to flounder. Just this morning,I read an article about the benefits children from poor background gain from a good preschool education, over priveliged children. Why is this the case? Because the material conditions of these poor children leave it so they're never able to attain their maximum biological potential; they never develop because they weren't lucky enough to have the means for it in the most crucial period of their lives. Not only is FAA a prevalent idea in psychology, it's corroborated by, and fundamental to the thoughts of everyone from Marx to Foucault, so don't be an irksome prick, and belittle people by saying that "there's nothing holding you back," because it's your very ignorance, and wilfully averted gaze to the material conditions of the poor and underpriveliged that ends up contributing to their marginalisation. Edited March 6, 2012 by The Bard
Daft Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Boom. Owned. Bard just set the high score on this thread.
Charlie Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 What utter bullshit. You absolutely cannot call someone's opinion and argument bullshit without backing it up with at least your own opinion if not saying why it's bullshit. That is incredibly insulting.
Yvonne Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 "America is the wealthiest nation on Earth, but its people are mainly poor, and poor Americans are urged to hate themselves. To quote the American humorist Kin Hubbard, 'it ain't no disgrace to be poor, but it might as well be.' It is in fact a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore more estimable than anyone with power and gold. No such tales are told by American poor. They mock themselves and glorify their betters. The meanest eating or drinking establishment, owned by a man who is himself poor, is very likely to have a sign on its wall asking this cruel question: 'If you're so smart, why ain't you rich??' There will also be an American flag no larger than a child's hand--glued to a lollipop stick and flying from the cash register. Americans, like human beings everywhere, believe many things that are obviously untrue. Their most destructive untruth is that it is very easy for any American to make money. They will not acknowledge how in fact hard money is to come by, and, therefore, those who have no money blame and blame and blame themselves. This inward blame has been a treasure for the rich and powerful, who have had to do less for their poor, publicly and privately, than any other ruling class since, say, Napoleonic times." - Kurt Vonnegut, Slaughterhouse 5
Jamba Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 I love how everyone has jumped on everyone else's opinion here and extrapolated it to the extreme. C'mon people... I think that the article itself is full of bitching and moaning and full of the sort of passive aggressive rage that makes people actively misunderstand what others are trying to say; just like is happening in this thread.
Daft Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 (edited) You absolutely cannot call someone's opinion and argument bullshit without backing it up with at least your own opinion if not saying why it's bullshit. That is incredibly insulting. Good. Your opinion is incredibly insulting. It's also purile, ignorant and utterly simplistic. Honestly if you can't see the bullshit you're spewing I'm not sure what I could say. You know rich people who acknowledge they are incredibly lucky? Great. I know rich people who called back a Big Issue seller at dinner and asked him why he didn't just get a real fucking job, before tossing change at him. Anechdotal evidence is naff. Alan Sugar works bloody hard? I'm sure he did. But to assume hard work automatically equals success is naive at best and downright fascistic at worst (Arbeit macht frei, anyone?). Danny's Monboit quote is spot on - except he doesn't even need to extend the notion to a 'third world country' as poverty has taken root in the West for quite some time. I noticed you ignored that point. The Bard has been gracious enough to attempt to educate you - that's more than I think your opinions afford you. Edited March 6, 2012 by Daft
Diageo Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 Jeez Daft, calm down. No need to degrade the discussion with derogatory remarks.
Iun Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 Yawn, what a dull little article. Perhaps there should be one entitled "Dumb Crap Poor People Say" "oh, I can't afford to take care of all these kids!" "cigarettes and booze are so expensive!" "why does everyone look at me like I'm scum when I go to Tesco in my slippers?"
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 Well maybe calm your attitude then. Can't even afford your coloured text anymore? Fucking peasants...
ipaul Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 I know rich people who called back a Big Issue seller at dinner and asked him why he didn't just get a real fucking job, before tossing change at him. Woah what? o_O Care to elaborate?
Charlie Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 @Daft You're acting like a child who doesn't know how to debate or even have a simple discussion so I'm not going to entertain you.
Recommended Posts