Teachers and Students > Debates
Why can equality not prevail?
Alpha:
*ahem*
And therefore, I can conclude:
Poverty is because Bill Gates is. 8)
$tyli$h Executive:
--- Quote from: Cleo~patra VII on December 10, 2010, 02:23:35 pm ---He admits. :D
--- End quote ---
Yes. :P
--- Quote ---Is there not something called "natural death"?
--- End quote ---
Still, it must be because of something. Some disease or accident or something like that. Therefore, my previous argument would hold true in case of natural death too.
--- Quote ---You use a decade to compare, and are talking about "rapidly"...
Absolute poverty... not relative. Therefore, poverty exists.
--- End quote ---
Yes I used a decade. But you can compare with the previous year too. You'll see that, unless you suffered a substantial business failure (God forbid), you are better off than you were. I used a decade just because I wanted to illustrate a sample timeframe. ;)
I do not deny that poverty exists. I just claim that it is decreasing rapidly.
--- Quote ---*ahem*
And therefore, I can conclude:
Poverty is because Bill Gates is
--- End quote ---
I just invalidated :P your previous arguments. Therefore, you cannot claim that. :P ::)
0kelvin:
The Matrix. Imagine if everything in the world, includding consciousness and self awarness, could be represented by a constant function f(x) = something.
Deadly_king:
--- Quote from: Cleo~patra VII on December 10, 2010, 12:29:54 pm ---
If you think well, inequality isn't bad. Everybody cannot be equal if man has to move on in life.
I don't imagine myself living in a world where everybody is poor, everybody illiterate, and everybody, a criminal. It can be in this sense too, nah. ;)
--- End quote ---
Inequality is essential for human kind. GOD has created us different from each other for a reason. ;)
Else everyone would have been clones of each other with the same wants. ;D
But you can't also imagine yourself living in a world where everyone is rich, educated but lazy and waste a lot.
Deadly_king:
--- Quote from: Bill Gates on December 10, 2010, 01:31:14 pm ---There is some contradiction here. In the previous part, you said that we do have a right to prosper and earn the maximum. While in the latter part you said that greed is not good ie. possessing more than one needs/deserves. How can one prosper and earn the maximum and at the same time, possess not more than one needs/deserves?
--- End quote ---
I said you have a right. This does not mean that we must do it. ;)
You should work just enough, not in excess and not less either. There's no doubt that the whole society will prosper in this way. :)
--- Quote from: Bill Gates on December 10, 2010, 01:31:14 pm ---Also, the word need and deserve was used as the synonym. I don't think this is the case. In my opinion, whether someone deserves something is determined by whether he has it or not. You deserve it, so you have it. You don't, so you don't have it. Its pretty simple.
--- End quote ---
You have a point here. :D
But unfortunately in our cruel world some persons who rightfully deserve it do not have it while those who don't deserve it, have it. This is why according to me, it's better that only people who need it, have it and not those who deserve it.
--- Quote from: Bill Gates on December 10, 2010, 01:31:14 pm ---To be realistic, one needs very less. I need very less wealth to cover my basic needs (eg. shelter, food, security etc). Talking in that respect, I do not need to study in a good expensive school which offers Cambridge syllabuses. I can get my basic education in a local, feeble one. That would cover my needs well. While at the same time, I'm sure, this is something everyone including you would disapprove of.
The desire to acquire excessive wealth and materialistic possessions has been the root of all progress of mankind. It is a virtue and everyone should practice it, in my opinion. Everyone should have the excessive desire to acquire excessive wealth and they should work for it. This system will ensure our (the mankind, as a whole)'s progress.
It is only harmful when someone directly competes for the resources of others. What I mean to say is, take the example of a person. He has a friend who has more wealth than him. He becomes greedy of his friend's wealth.
Now, this can be expressed in two ways. First: Due to this desire, he can set his mind to be more wealthy than his friend. By doing so, he will have to do better in business and/or his job. Or he will have to look for other better opportunities which may feed his desire. Second: He becomes jealous of his friend and makes a plot to grab his wealth by some means.
The first one is a virtue, is good, and is something which has caused the human race to progress this far. The second one is not good and often backfires.
I hope I'm clear.
--- End quote ---
Well, my dear friend, our resources on Earth are limited and inter-related. We cannot progress without being the prime reason of our colleague's failure. Even if we're not at all jealous of our colleague and are in no case competing against each other. ;)
I understand that we should acquire wealth for our own progress but if we limit ourselves to a specific height and personally take the resolution of not exceeding, even if we have the chance to do so, this will ensure the progress of the whole human kind. Not only the rich ones. ;D
Our personal benefit should be preceded by the advantage of the human race. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version