Post #414,564
10/16/16 10:56:27 PM
10/16/16 10:56:27 PM
|
Re: Inherited wealth or a job with a living wage is the requirement.
There are several other ways - and note that I left the definition of "wealth" open to non-financial situations - but speaking of financial situations . . .
Once upon a time (late 19th century) there was a destitute nobleman, a Prince. All he had to his name was a title, and he was a homosexual in a time unfriendly to such things.
He married the heir to the Singer Sewing Machine fortune. She was a Lesbian. He got financial stability, she got a title: Princess.
This became one of the great love stories of the era, they adored each other, but never slept in the same bed.
What the world got was a patron and patroness of the arts and music, who financed many of the greatest composers of the age.
|
Post #414,565
10/16/16 11:02:36 PM
10/16/16 11:02:36 PM
|
wealth can be happy to have what you have
All I need is a little dirt, a shack to sleep out of the rain and a brown hard likker to drink every now and again. Unfortunately none of the people around me would be happy to be that wealthy always look out for number one and don't step in number two
|
Post #414,579
10/17/16 8:18:12 AM
10/17/16 8:18:12 AM
|
I understand that.
But if one grows up in a consumer driven Capitalist state and does not recognize Capitalism's propaganda for what it is (and the overwhelming majority growing up in such a society do not), then "happiness" is equated with "material wealth." If one is not born into a state of wealth, then the only way to achieve or even pursue what is commonly understood to be "happiness" in a Capitalist state is via a job with a living or better wage. For in a Capitalist society, money is happiness and vice versa. bcnu,
Mikem
We read one day, We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.
MLK
|
Post #414,580
10/17/16 8:49:13 AM
10/17/16 8:49:13 AM
|
Let me get this straight
When people say Trump and Clinton are the only viable options and that voting for anyone else is a meaningless protest, you say that you simply can't accept those choices just because that's what the system has chosen to present.
But the very definition of happiness you're resigned accepting the capitalist definition.
|
Post #414,584
10/17/16 9:06:43 AM
10/17/16 9:06:43 AM
|
Not at all.
What part of "the overwhelming majority" is unclear? bcnu,
Mikem
We read one day, We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.
MLK
|
Post #414,586
10/17/16 10:01:11 AM
10/17/16 10:01:11 AM
|
Oh, nuance?
You were defending ... But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. ... by saying ... For in a Capitalist society, money is happiness and vice versa. This is what happens when you make a habit of speaking categorically. If you don't give other people the courtesy of nuance, you don't get to claim it for yourself.
|
Post #414,588
10/17/16 10:55:52 AM
10/17/16 10:55:52 AM
|
No, I wasn't. I was defending that I had properly quoted MLK in my sig!
bcnu,
Mikem
We read one day, We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.
MLK
|
