The following discussion stems from a friend posting this list of truths by William J. H. Boetcker:
- You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
- You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
- You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
- You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
- You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
- You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
- You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
- You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
- You cannot build character and courage by destroying men’s initiative and independence.
- And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.
The following is a conversation started in response to a friend posting the above and their friend responding with this:
I think the guy is waxing poetic about apples and oranges in the first sentence.
Rich and poor live in the same economic pool. They’re eating from the same pie, if someone has more pie someone else has less pie. So in a sense making the poor richer would require either making other poor people poorer or rich people poorer. When the rich get richer someone else is getting poorer because economics is based on limited supply. I think this statement contradicts your idea of inflation, money’s value is a derivative of something finite.
But that whole ‘strengthening the weak’ spiel is not analogous to economics and was an ad hominem.
We value scarcity, money is finite we can’t all be rich. I think my analogy was suffice, ‘Economic Pie’ if you can figure out a way to eat more than your share of pie without eating other people’s pie then you will convince me that the poor are not competing with the rich.
Yames is operating under the Marxist fallacy that has been debunked over and over. wealth is not a pie to be divided where the ownership of some detracts from the possibility of ownership of others. the trope that it is is rejected by the facts of modern economics, which is why it exists only in Leftist philosophy (emotion, not fact-based). the truth is that a rising tide lifts all boats and the existence of wealth is in no way the cause of poverty.
You’re joking right? You’re really arguing that value is not based on perceptive scarcity? And that wealth can be obtained by all? And you are implying that I stated wealth is the cause of poverty which is something I never said I said we are in competition. Once you agree that it is a competition for something that is limited we can move on and discuss how it does play into the distribution of wealth.
Otherwise I’m going into a coma.
I like the part where you ask if im joking for saying something i didnt say almost as much as the part where you claim that you didnt “imply” that wealth is the cause of poverty. I like the latter because its technically true. you didnt say it by implication, you just said it outright. You used the “wealth as a pie” false metaphor, which by definition means that wealth causes poverty, as (by definition), the larger a slice removed from the pie, the lesser is available to others. Once you understand your own words, other areas of the issue might become illuminated for you. Instead of going into a coma you should do the opposite and open your eyes (and mind) to the reality around you. This isnt 300 years ago. or 200. or even 100. The Marxist pap of the “economy pie” has no merit whatsoever in modern society. There is not a limited number of horses and cows and gold pocket watches and land on an island by which to measure wealth creation in terms of a pie. It is not a theory that wealth can be obtained by all – it is an observable fact. Wealth is infinitely expandable and can come from nothing. Steve Jobs turned apple orchards into billions of dollars of crazily high tech amazing machinery and software, making money through products that let others, including me, expand their own wealth if they so choose. He did not take pie slices from others, he grew the pie for all of us. Thats how modern economics works. You best wake up from your coma and realize it.