Skeptic Project

Your #1 COINTELPRO cognitive infiltration source.

Page By Category

Forum - Would you cut your comfort level in half to eradicate poverty?

[ Add Tags ]

[ Return to Economics and Business | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:31
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

Let's pretend that the global economy really is that simple.

Would you?

I wouldn't, as I already maintain a reasonable lifestyle by choice.

#1 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
sorryPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:35
(0)
 

Level: 12
CS Original

If my comfort level would actually decrease by erasing poverty, then no.

I have to imagine my comfort level would increase.

#2 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
anticultistPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:35
(0)
 

Brainwashing you for money

Level: 15
CS Original

Its unlikely I would because my comfort level is literally just about comfortable, any further cuts and I would be uncomfortable, which may make me feel better for others, but we would all be uncomfortable if they were at the same level as me.

If I was a millionaire it would go without question I could cut my income and still live comfortably.

#3 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
NanosPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:41
(0)
 

Level: 0
CS Original

I would yes.

Having been homeless and penniless, and enjoyed the comfort of quad walled cardboard to sit on, compared to that, I'm living in luxury..

So a reduction from a 32" widescreen TV to a 14" non-widescreen like I once had, I'm fine with that if it means no one else goes without.

#4 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:42
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Nanos:

"So a reduction from a 32" widescreen TV to a 14" non-widescreen like I once had, I'm fine with that if it means no one else goes without."

But what if the 14 inch is the starting measurement? Do we continue starting with smaller TVs until we no longer feel guilty? At which point is such a thing even measurable?

#5 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
sorryPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:42
(0)
 

Level: 12
CS Original

If your personal comfortability decreases, I assume this means your quality of life also decreases.

Why would you ever choose an option that would decrease it?

#6 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:45
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

Depends. If eradicating poverty would mean turning the third world into another glorious western society with depression rates between 15-50% and shoes with LED-lights, then no.

If we could eradicate poverty and build a simple, stable society with low propaganda and hierarchy levels, yup, you could probably sell me on that. I've lived through quite a bit of (financial) comfort levels and they don't seem to have that much influence on overall happiness.

#7 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:46
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

"Depends. If eradicating poverty would mean turning the third world into another glorious western society with depression rates between 15-50% and shoes with LED-lights, then no."

So sneakers with LED lights are a bigger problem for you than starving people?

That's a fairly odd position.

#8 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
NanosPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:54
(0)
 

Level: 0
CS Original

> But what if the 14 inch is the starting measurement? Do we continue starting
> with smaller TVs until we no longer feel guilty? At which point is such a thing
> even measurable?

It wasn't so long ago that most people didn't have televisions..

I remember as a kid, being one of the very few that did (My dad worked in television.), but when I went around to friends houses, they didn't..

It didn't do us any harm without it!

> Why would you ever choose an option that would decrease it?

To be nice to others.

Its also in our best interests to have happy neighhours..

> If we could eradicate poverty and build a simple, stable society with low propaganda
> and hierarchy levels, yup, you could probably sell me on that.

Agreed.

> I've lived through quite a bit of (financial) comfort levels and they don't seem
> to have that much influence on overall happiness.

Generally agreed. (I've gone from silverspoon to starving on the streets, and just a step up from that living in a cherry orchard, cherries for breakfast, for lunch, for tea, for dinner, wasn't so bad..)

I'm not hugely happier with an MP3 player compared with a cassette walkman. (I don't actually own a MP3 player, I'm too busy to spend time listening to music when I'm out!)

#9 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 12:56
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Nanos:

"I remember as a kid, being one of the very few that did (My dad worked in television.), but when I went around to friends houses, they didn't..

It didn't do us any harm without it!"

That wasn't really the point of my question, bro.

The point was to find out where you begin measuring and where you end.

#10 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:05
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

"So sneakers with LED lights are a bigger problem for you than starving people?

That's a fairly odd position. "

They're just a symbol for a huge load of crap that's supposed to make you happy but doesnt, but without selling millions of it, we wouldn't be able to obtain the wealth me do, at least some of us.

Maybe I'm a fairly odd guy for thinking about these things instead of using them even more for my advantage, we'll see.

#11 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:10
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Cyborg:

"They're just a symbol for a huge load of crap that's supposed to make you happy but doesnt, but without selling millions of it, we wouldn't be able to obtain the wealth me do, at least some of us."

So you're saying that people are incapable of feeling happiness from the purchase of sneakers with LED lights on them?

#12 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:15
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

"So you're saying that people are incapable of feeling happiness from the purchase of sneakers with LED lights on them? "

I'm suggesting there might be more sensible applications of our resources and workforce, than selling sneakers with LEDs to rich white kids. You're free to differ on that one.

#13 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
NanosPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:26
(0)
 

Level: 0
CS Original

> The point was to find out where you begin measuring and where you end.

Ah right, well.

Looking briefly at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint</p>

And there was some useful debate on the TZM forums about the question, from what I vaguely remember, at the moment taking for example, the UK, we would have to exist on 1/4 the current average standard of living to support everyone.

Not an easy thing to figure out for sure..

I can quite imagine it might mean shared community TV sets for example to start with.. (Or in the old days, as it was known, the family TV..)

> I'm suggesting there might be more sensible applications of our resources
> and workforce, than selling sneakers with LEDs to rich white kids.

Agreed.

#14 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:34
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Cyborg:

"I'm suggesting there might be more sensible applications of our resources and workforce, than selling sneakers with LEDs to rich white kids. You're free to differ on that one."

Why did ethnicity become a factor suddenly? Why are some commercial products more noble than others? Are white people who purchase sneakers with LEDs worse than dark people who purchase sneakers with LEDs?

Personally speaking, I just bought a new pair of Birkenstocks. It made me really fucking happy.

Am I less intelligent than you because purchasing new shoes brought me joy? Have I squandered my money on an otherwise sensible application? Or am I okay because my Birks have no LEDs? Perhaps I am just screwed because I was born white.

#15 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
NanosPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 13:44
(0)
 

Level: 0
CS Original

> Perhaps I am just screwed because I was born white.

You are if you live here!

> Why did ethnicity become a factor suddenly?

Its funny, I'm white, I've no idea what colour Cyborg is, but I didn't find that racist myself.

> Why are some commercial products more noble than others?

I guess that is the $64,000 question..

#16 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:02
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Nanos:

I don't think Cyborg is a racist, I am just confused as to why it is worse for white people to buy shoes with LEDs than other ethnic groups.

Most likely its just due to it being more "acceptable" to blame whites, but prejudice is prejudice.

#17 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:03
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

"Am I less intelligent than you because purchasing new shoes brought me joy?"

Nope, I didn't even aim at personal choice. I just think that a society that has plenty sneakers with lights, but little overall happiness - less than people in the 50's, is a little fucked up.

"Personally speaking, I just bought a new pair of Birkenstocks. It made me really fucking happy."

...really? Just kidding.

For the record, I own a pretty expensive helicopter simulator, maybe I'll even buy another screen for it. To quote Adorno's Minima Moralia: Wrong life cannot be lived rightly.

edit: The "rich white kid" thing was a pun at markets, not ethnicity. I haven't seen a single ad with a non-white kid and that kind of crap, but maybe that's just me.

#18 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:05
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

@Cyborg:

"I just think that a society that has plenty sneakers with lights, but little overall happiness - less than people in the 50's, is a little fucked up."

Is there a measurement for the amount of overall happiness?

"For the record, I own a pretty expensive helicopter simulator, maybe I'll even buy another screen for it."

You know, you can get a pair of sneakers with LEDs for a lot less than a helicopter simulator.

Seems like you're squandering sensible resources!

"edit: The "rich white kid" thing was a pun at markets, not ethnicity. I haven't seen a single ad with a non-white kid and that kind of crap, but maybe that's just me. "

I suggest looking at advertisements that have been done post-1950. Lots of dark folks in them.

#19 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
domokatoPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:16
(0)
 

Level: 4
CS Original

I wouldn't say my lifestyle is too extravagant either, so I don't think I would cut my comfort level in half. I have a decent income, but I don't spend it frivolously. Then again, isn't extravagance relative across both socioeconomic status and time?

If everyone else were to cut their comfort levels to be around the same level (in such a way that the world wouldn't stop spinning), I might do it. But then I'm caught by the thought that maybe I deserve the comfort level I have, because my parents worked hard to bring me up and provide as many opportunities as possible, and because I worked hard and made the most of those opportunities. It would seem kind of unfair to take all that away.

At the same time, it seems kind of unfair for children born into unfortunate circumstances to live a hard life because of it. If there was some way to level the playing field for all new babies born, I would probably be for that.

#20 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:17
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

"Is there a measurement for the amount of overall happiness?"

If you don't trust surveys on happiness, take statistics on stress, mental diseases and suicide.

"You know, you can get a pair of sneakers with LEDs for a lot less than a helicopter simulator."

You don't learn how to fly helicopters this way, I guess. Doesn't really help me that much.

"Seems like you're squandering sensible resources!"

It's not about what I as a single guy do, that's why I quoted Teddy. It's about what society as a whole does, and that's more about structure and reward/punishment than individual choice.

#21 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:22
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

"You don't learn how to fly helicopters this way, I guess. Doesn't really help me that much."

Why do you need to learn how to fly a helicopter? What rationale do you use to say that spending money on a helicopter simulator rather than giving it to someone who has nothing is the correct thing to do?

"It's not about what I as a single guy do, that's why I quoted Teddy. It's about what society as a whole does, and that's more about structure and reward/punishment than individual choice. "

So basically, everyone else's backyards have the problem. But not the one with expensive helicopter simulators.

#22 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Sil the ShillPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:36
(0)
 

Level: 9
CS Original

Are LED shoes back in style?

#23 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:36
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

I'm going to answer my own question, just to establish that it's perfectly okay to care more about your own needs than others.

"Why do you need to learn how to fly a helicopter?"

Because I go to work every day and I goddamn choose to.

See, it doesn't hurt.

#24 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
CyborgJesusPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 14:56
(0)
 

Level: 6
CS Original

"Why do you need to learn how to fly a helicopter?"

It's fun. Work hard, play hard...besides a few other benefits, but I won't go into that.

"What rationale do you use to say that spending money on a helicopter simulator rather than giving it to someone who has nothing is the correct thing to do?"

I reinvest most of the money I make and spend some dumb money on things like helicopter simulators, because that's something I like to have.

If I use the leverage I gain through that to create - or help other people with - a greater change, I think that's much more valuable than a drop in the bucket now.

"So basically, everyone else's backyards have the problem. But not the one with expensive helicopter simulators. "

Nope, all "backyards" have the problem, and me doing something with my own wouldn't change a thing about anybody else's.

I'd much rather focus on finding people with ideas about how to take care of all backyards in a reliable way, spending much thought about what exactly to do with my own seems like a waste of time to me.

#25 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Agent MattPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 16:11
(0)
 

Genuine American Monster

Level: 70
CS Original

"I'd much rather focus on finding people with ideas about how to take care of all backyards in a reliable way, spending much thought about what exactly to do with my own seems like a waste of time to me."

Sounds like a way to blame everyone else and point out problems without having to take any initiative on your own. Sounds like a cop out, albeit a well rationalized one.

But that's my opinion.

#26 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
AltonPosted: Jun 16, 2010 - 17:32
(0)
 

Level: 1
CS Original

Since one's comfort level is related to their happiness, I don't think he or she should cut their comfort level to eradicate poverty. I see it where each person can evaluate to see if helping to eradicate poverty contributes to their lifetime happiness. Since society is an aggregation of individuals, each person needs feedback to assess whom they want to interact with because outside of those who are very disabled, who wants to interact or help with leeches or folks who have a poor reputation of being irresponsible?

#27 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]