1073
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

you do have a point in the sense that if we live in a utopia, I think there is good reason to think that it shouldn't matter what choices people make, they all get the same 'reward'/financial outcome/etc.

You said:

If the world has the resources to allow it, then why should one person be punished for chasing their joy while another is rewarded?

Yes okay, but what if there are limited resources? Or a world that needs improvement? Isn't it then better to incentivize people to work hard to make our world of limited resources a world of abundance? If yes, then it means to give those a higher reward at the expense of those who made "other choices".

Are we now living in a world of limited resources / that needs improvement? If yes, then it would probably be justified to take from those who made "other choices"

[-] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

Who decides what deserves more wealth and respect? People don’t make rational decisions in this regard. Most of the time the people with more power will simply decide that their area of expertise deserves the most resources and respect.

[-] wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago

true but generally speaking one could say he who makes abundance for us all, deserves more.

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

We don't live in a zero sum game though. We can and should just go out into the solar system and get enough resources such that everyone is guaranteed an upper middle class lifestyle regardless of life choices.

The only reason you should be denied resources is if you commit a violent crime. Even that's kind of debatable

[-] wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

We don’t live in a zero sum game though.

Perhaps. I never stated that we are. I was just pointing to a hypothetical world with limited resources, and what then would be most appropriate.

[-] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

A hypothetical world with limited resources is a zero-sum game, especially the way you're describing it.

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
1073 points (96.6% liked)

Murdered by Words

1212 readers
1 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS