Article successful! Class-warfare is very present here in this forum.
It is absolutely stupid to say that wealthy people are evil... anyone here that thinks that is a dumb-ass... plain and simple. They give the overwhelming vast majority of the charity, they pay for the opportunity for OTHERS to give charity, they provide loans, they provide the tax base that pays for much of our infrastructure, they pretty much pay for everything. They also provide all of the jobs, and provide the means for the government to provide jobs.
Seriously, you guys are complete ****ing idiots if you think the wealthy are evil.
Who said wealthy were evil?
The study doesn't as much as people try to read into it.
BTW there have been at least 7 studies done at Berkely that show similar results!
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-21-2014).]
OK, so let's do that here, too, and let Jesus speak:
And Jesus said to His disciples, "Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." - Matthew 19:23 and 19:24
How much clearer could he have possibly been?
Well, since he was talking about trusting in riches, not about the character of rich people, he was clear enough. What is clear is that you don't understand His subject.
quote
Originally posted by FlyinFieros:
"Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." Matthew 8:20.
He did say that, but the our topic is the evil nature of rich people, not where Jesus would sleep. One more time, He never condemned rich people for being rich. He pointed out, as neither you nor yellowstone appear to understand, that faith in riches instead of the Son of God would not get them into heaven.
I notice you didn't bother to acknowledge that the people I listed were rich, and according to the Book, none of them were greedy or evil.
The distance between the ultra rich and all of the rest of us does concern me. Of course being rich doesn't mean being evil. Once wealth is acquired though it is much easier to get more and if there is no concern about others in the acquisition it can become a moral issue. Long ago I decided that materialism is no path to happiness even though I do enjoy a certain amount of materialism. The thing is that if that is what drives you, you will always be unsatisfied. Every time you acquire what you think will make you happy, you will find that there is something else you desire. The things that you didn't previously considered unattainable now become desirable and there is no end.
He pointed out, as neither you nor yellowstone appear to understand, that faith in riches instead of the Son of God would not get them into heaven.
Actually, no. The quote quite literally says that it's impossible for rich people to get into heaven. Unless eyes of needles are made larger than usual or camels smaller. Where does it say anything about "faith in riches"?
Not that I would care that much personally as there is no heaven...
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 05-21-2014).]
The distance between the ultra rich and all of the rest of us does concern me. Of course being rich doesn't mean being evil. Once wealth is acquired though it is much easier to get more and if there is no concern about others in the acquisition it can become a moral issue. Long ago I decided that materialism is no path to happiness even though I do enjoy a certain amount of materialism. The thing is that if that is what drives you, you will always be unsatisfied. Every time you acquire what you think will make you happy, you will find that there is something else you desire. The things that you didn't previously considered unattainable now become desirable and there is no end.
Enlightened
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-21-2014).]
Actually, no. The quote quite literally says that it's impossible for rich people to get into heaven. Unless eyes of needles are made larger than usual or camels smaller. Where does it say anything about "faith in riches"?
Not that I would care that much personally as there is no heaven...
Not even a Silicon one? Then where would all of the calculators go?
Well good for you! I never said anyone needed to believe my take on the story. I've always thought people should use their own mind, draw their own conclusions and make their own decisions.
I haven't told you to eat or breath today, so I'm really hoping you took it upon yourself to make up your own mind and weren't waiting for me to tell you what to do and to believe.
Isn't it your imagination that is trying to connect this study to class warfare?
If that's the only explanation that creeps into what passes for your mind, feel free to believe that. Don't fret. I'm sure all is well and you can ignore everything that's too upsetting to believe.
The world is a much nicer place when you only have to believe what you want to believe. As long as that works for you - keep it up.
Originally posted by Formula88: If that's the only explanation that creeps into what passes for your mind, feel free to believe that. Don't fret. I'm sure all is well and you can ignore everything that's too upsetting to believe.
The world is a much nicer place when you only have to believe what you want to believe. As long as that works for you - keep it up.
Sarcasm and insults? It was a question to get you thinking about what you said. Lots of irony in your response.
[This message has been edited by FlyinFieros (edited 05-21-2014).]
Actually, no. The quote quite literally says that it's impossible for rich people to get into heaven. Unless eyes of needles are made larger than usual or camels smaller. Where does it say anything about "faith in riches"?
Not that I would care that much personally as there is no heaven...
Since you don't believe (no disrespect of that choice intended in pointing that out), you would have no reason to continue on to read the immediate context.
"25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."
It IS literally impossible for rich people to get into heaven--on their own. Well, add those to the list. It is impossible for the poor as well. And religious. And, and, and.
Just that the context before the verses you guys were talking about happened to be about a rich young ruler. A person who had said he kept the whole Jewish law (and therefore would be righteous and could make it to heaven on his own merit). Jesus told him to give all his riches away and follow Jesus. He did that in order to help the person see that he actually wasn't keeping all the commandments, covetousness being one he was breaking.
Jesus doesn't condemn riches. 1 Tim 6:9 But they that WILL be rich fall into temptation and a snare... Tying this back to the original post, and personal experience.
As someone who has been poor, and is now rich, it is a tricky thing to be rich. It would be very easy to get an evil attitude about it. Status. Purchasing power. Look down your nose at others. Inflated assessment of your self importance. Putting yourself above others. Thinking you deserve to be served instead of serving others. Stupid human nature, but you have to and can successfully fight against it.
But look at the study. It wasn't just the wealthy. It happened to people they temporarily tricked into feeling wealthy. (the ...they that WILL be rich...crowd).
Nothing particular wrong with the study. And nothing particularly "news" about the study. The problem is what conclusions will be drawn and done about it. You already have a President who has been fostering the illegitimacy of someone who is rich, and casting evil on them. Now a study like this. All just a foundational basis to make people feel completely justified in trying to take those riches away from those evil people because they deserve to have that done for them for the way they treat others.
That's what this is really all about.
Well, even in this study, it was maybe half that were "evil". Yeah, well that won't stop the redistributionists from targeting all the wealthy. Where if it was really about the study, it would be no big deal. Because as the article stated, there aren't that many wealthy. So you shouldn't be affected by one very often because they are a small group, so a small problem.
Nothing particular wrong with the study. And nothing particularly "news" about the study.
Yep, I agree. It's not the problem of scientists and researchers what others make of their findings as long as they're sound. That's why the title of this thread is so misleading. Maybe it should be: Someone may use this Berkeley study to try to "prove" that the rich are evil but that's not what the study says at all.
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 05-21-2014).]
Yep, I agree. It's not the problem of scientists and researchers what others make of their findings as long as they're sound. That's why the title of this thread is so misleading. Maybe it should be: Someone may use this Berkeley study to try to "prove" that the rich are evil but that's not what the study says at all.
Originally posted by heybjorn: He did say that, but the our topic is the evil nature of rich people, not where Jesus would sleep. One more time, He never condemned rich people for being rich. He pointed out, as neither you nor yellowstone appear to understand, that faith in riches instead of the Son of God would not get them into heaven.
quote
Originally posted by frontal lobe:
Since you don't believe (no disrespect of that choice intended in pointing that out), you would have no reason to continue on to read the immediate context.
"25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."
It IS literally impossible for rich people to get into heaven--on their own. Well, add those to the list. It is impossible for the poor as well. And religious. And, and, and.
Just that the context before the verses you guys were talking about happened to be about a rich young ruler. A person who had said he kept the whole Jewish law (and therefore would be righteous and could make it to heaven on his own merit). Jesus told him to give all his riches away and follow Jesus. He did that in order to help the person see that he actually wasn't keeping all the commandments, covetousness being one he was breaking.
Jesus doesn't condemn riches. 1 Tim 6:9 But they that WILL be rich fall into temptation and a snare... Tying this back to the original post, and personal experience.
Yep! Context context context.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 05-22-2014).]
Originally posted by dratts: Every time you acquire what you think will make you happy, you will find that there is something else you desire. The things that you didn't previously considered unattainable now become desirable and there is no end.
And he said to them, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” Luke 12:15
quote
Originally posted by Pyrthian: ... But, I must ask the question: who is NOT evil?
And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” Mark 7:20-23
No, I meant from the quote that was posted in this thread. I did see him dancing with a piece of exercise equipment today when I turned the music up a little...
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 05-22-2014).]
No, I meant from the quote that was posted in this thread. I did see him dancing with a piece of exercise equipment today when I turned the music up a little...
Thought maybe you were going to ask him about the quote, if it was really his, and perhaps if he still feels that way.
How about people who worked hard and made their way out of poverty? Can we bash them next?
Oh yes, how could we have forgotten. We have to get rid of them first because they make everyone else look bad. They should be first on our list. Especially the ones who have become wealthy as a result of it, they must go first.
Speaking of context... that's not what the studies suggest but that doesn't seem to bother many here.
quote
Originally posted by yellowstone:
But the thread title says it and why bother with the details?
quote
Originally posted by yellowstone: ... Someone may use this Berkeley study to try to "prove" that the rich are evil but that's not what the study says at all.
What the article does say: rich people are greedy and see nothing wrong with it, unethical, different from the rest of "us", lost a little of their moral character, wont yield at 4 way stop signs, cut people off, ignore pedestrians in crosswalks, more willing to break the law, most are jerks, think they are better than "you", more willing to cheat, have a mental frame of mind that they are at the top and can get away with things others cant, are hoarding vast wealth while others starve because of it, are the cause of something being wrong with america. Then says "His jammed mailbox also confirms that, he added." (..bandwagon..) .Its not just facts its alot of opinion and leading. You tell me.. did they single them out and do any demonizing?
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 05-23-2014).]
Originally posted by 2.5: What the article does say: rich people are greedy and see nothing wrong with it, unethical, different from the rest of "us", lost a little of their moral character, wont yield at 4 way stop signs, cut people off, ignore pedestrians in crosswalks, more willing to break the law, most are jerks, think they are better than "you", more willing to cheat, have a mental frame of mind that they are at the top and can get away with things others cant, are hoarding vast wealth while others starve because of it, are the cause of something being wrong with america. Then says "His jammed mailbox also confirms that, he added." (..bandwagon..) .Its not just facts its alot of opinion and leading. You tell me.. did they single them out and do any demonizing?
The ARTICLE has opinion just as this thread title does.
The ARTICLE has opinion just as this thread title does.
The studies results are separate.
The words "thread title"? I love how folks get all bent because of a thread title. OK, so you choose the title that fits you, and then carry on with the meat of the product. My gawd.
Like a lawyer trying to get his client off of a murder that was caught on tape, in front of witnesses, then uses the defense that his client was not read his rights. Legally correct, but morally foolish.
[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 05-23-2014).]
The words "thread title"? I love how folks get all bent because of a thread title. OK, so you choose the title that fits you, and then carry on with the meat of the product. My gawd.
It's the "meat of the product" that's being ignored.
quote
Originally posted by Tony Kania:
Like a lawyer trying to get his client off of a murder that was caught on tape, in front of witnesses, then uses the defense that his client was not read his rights. Legally correct, but morally foolish.
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-23-2014).]
Speaking of context... that's not what the studies suggest but that doesn't seem to bother many here.
The study was that the "rich" have lower ethics, are greedy, and have lost moral character.
The thread title concluded those behaviors are evil. I guess if you want to give another interpretation to those characteristics other than evil, that is completely legitimate and please feel free to express what your conclusion is.
Still, then let me rephrase the question so there is zero contextual ambiguity.
So are there any other groups besides the rich that we want to study to prove they have lower ethics?
Still, then let me rephrase the question so there is zero contextual ambiguity. So are there any other groups besides the rich that we want to study to prove they have lower ethics?
Actually many times we vehemently deny any others, and perhaps go as far as refusing to allow others to to talk about it. Instead dismissing and labeling one who speaks about it as intolerant or discriminating.
