Does Money Make You Mean?

A rather long but very educational article on wealth and selfishness. In my opinion, well worth the time to read through to the end, especially to the end!

Life Unscripted

graphic

I’ve been thinking a lot about why it’s dangerous to elect rich politicians.  It’s easy to have an opinion on the subject but facts to support such an opinion seem hard to come by.

In an age where we have more information than knowledge there are a lot of questions that  I find myself hard pressed to answer in a way that other people are happy to hear.  I know I’ve always been a leftie in a right-handed world; I know I’ve always been just little bit socially obtuse; but I look at the world differently than my friends (I won’t even say “than most of my friends” because I know that’s not true).  One of those questions is about why rich people behave as abominably as they do.  Yes — I’m making a value judgment about other people, and I make no apologies because I have seen and occasionally…

View original post 3,524 more words

16 thoughts on “Does Money Make You Mean?

  1. Hyperion

    An excellent thought provoking article. Anyone that examines the plethora of facts and figures regarding government and private sector spending on charity and social services knows, it is too little too late. No amount of funds and labor will turn the tide of social decline and neediness. RAS seems to make sense when one doesn’t believe in wasting their hard earned wealth on a global problem with a voracious appetite. Ungracious entitlement, corruption, greed, and ineptitude in the charity and social services networks turn caring people away from the growing disaster that is sweeping the planet. No worries. Rich and poor will share the same plague eventually, and social status will be meaningless in the end.

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Quote: “Rich and poor will share the same plague eventually, and social status will be meaningless in the end.” I’d like to see those words stamped across the heavens for the whole world to see and ponder.

      Reply
      1. Sha'Tara Post author

        Hey Daniel, let me see if I can complete that sentence… 🙂 One: living in denial doesn’t change anything. Two: people who live in denial don’t change. Am I missing a third possibility?

  2. franklparker

    Thanks for sharing that, Sha’tara. I commented on the orignal. Within recorded history there has never been a time when there were not powerful individuals/families who controlled all of the wealth and kept the 99% in slavery or something very close to it. Two millenia ago the founder of the religion that most of western civilisation clings to made what is arguably one of the most selfish statements ever made. When his followers challenged him about the percieved waste in the action of a woman who annointed his feet, suggesting that she should be helping the poor instead, he is supposed to have said: “the poor will always be with you.” (implying “but I won’t”).

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Indeed you are correct. Quoting from two of the four official gospels:
      Mark 14:7
      The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them whenever you want. But you will not always have Me.

      John 12:8
      The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have Me.”

      Jesus claimed to have been “God” inasmuch as he claimed to be the son of god. Later pseudo-historians and interpreters or researchers claim to have traced his family roots to the pharaohs’ of Egypt, thus making him a genuine “blue blood” or indeed a son of god if by “god” we mean actual flesh and blood beings. The above quotes then make sense if he knew himself to be of royal blood. After all, no matter where you find them, the elites believe they have some mandate to come first. Yes, his response is horrible and only brainwashing prevents Christians from picking up on it and questioning it. If we were to discuss Jesus in light of the New Testament, he was little more than a con artist, a charlatan. It was very disappointing to me when I uncovered that obvious truth – he was my #1 hero once upon a time…

      Reply
  3. Phil Huston

    I was once told a story about a regular guy courting a wealthy girl. She was infatuated, in love, they couldn’t keep their hands off each other, it was the love of a lifetime. He opened his heart to her, exposed his dream, and she said, “I hear you, and I love you more than anything, but we need to talk about the elephant in the room.”
    Money doesn’t make you mean. But it does distort perception and it does that from the grandiose down to the face to face level.

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      An excellent observation about money. Quote: [money] “does distort perception and it does that from the grandiose down to the face to face level.” Distorts perception (and at all economic levels) – I don’t think I’ve ever seen it expressed better. Food for thought here, Phil, thank you.

      Reply
      1. Phil Huston

        There’s conceptually no difference between one homeless person mugging another for a dollar, a desperate doper killing a convenience store clerk for $12 or divorces over breadwinner arguments, millionaire CEOs screwing each other over access to some natural or man made resource or billionaires duking it out by hook or crook for market share. Or armies over turf and resources. It’s all about the distortion money puts on the human equation all across the spectrum. Someone has it, someone doesn’t – now they can’t get along. Some days I think that’s what the line “what’s Love got to do with it” is all about. Don’t show me your heart, show me your bank statement.

      2. Sha'Tara Post author

        Exactly, and that is why most discussions and arguments about “economic disparity” serve no purpose but to exacerbate the conflict between economic classes.

  4. sherazade

    Grazie È un articolo molto interessante sul quale c’è poco o forse troppo da dire perché è una situazione che Difficilmente potrà essere modificata a livello globale i ricchi i pochissimi ricchi terranno ben strette i loro beni perché generatori di potere.
    Una “saggia” donna italiana nata ricca e diventata ricchissima intervistata ha sostenuto che per vivere da nababbo bastano €300.000 l’anno tutto il resto è sciupato nell’inutilità di essere consumato direttamente.
    Non sono così positiva come l’ultimo messaggio dell’articolo a tutti i livelli economici è sovrastante l’egoismo individuale.
    Shera😐

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Shera, I agree with you on your last observation here. Individual egoism crosses all class/race/gender lines. That I too have observed. It doesn’t take away from the studies made according to the article though – it was focusing on the rich and their particular attitude to the rest of the world. A rich egotist creates much more misery than a monetarily poor one, IMO.

      [Transl: Shera, sono d’accordo con te sulla tua ultima osservazione qui. L’egoismo individuale attraversa tutte le linee di classe / razza / genere. Che anch’io ho osservato. Tuttavia, non toglie nulla agli studi fatti in base all’articolo, ma si concentrava sui ricchi e sul loro atteggiamento particolare nei confronti del resto del mondo. Un egocentrico ricco crea molta più miseria di una monetariamente povera, l’IMO.]

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.