So basically the same thing I just said only worded slightly different. The set your own moral and ethical boundaries says it all.
2 Likes
One can always take things as far into the criminal side as one wishes. Iâm saying that the criminality isnât necessary in order to become rich. It may be faster, (though thatâs not a guarantee; might even end sooner and abruptly) but it isnât necessary.
I have a feeling that anyone who has grown their own wealth has, at one time or another, gotten into the ethical/moral weeds of technicalities from time to time. Itâs up to the individual as to how far to go. Not all successful people cheated/stole/exploited/murdered their way into the upper ranks, no matter what Marx said.
1 Like
Iâm far from being a Marxist or a communist.,.very far. How many can you name who did it honestly? Iâve been called several names since I started on this forum, never in a million years did I figure anyone would associate me with Marxists.
3 Likes
Are you talking about politicians, or just millionaires in general?
I personally know a few millionaires who became that way simply by being hard workers. Ours is a system of capitalism, where hard work,consistent investing over a lifetime, and living within ones means can allow anyone to become a millionaire. One millionaire friend was an Army Ranger as good and pure as anyone I have ever met. He continues to bust his ass to help others to this very day, despite having had to retire due to a debilitating illness.
4 Likes
Not calling you a Marxist, just saying that some of what you expressed here bears a resemblance to Marxist rhetoric.
Maybe half a dozen, but then Iâm not personally acquainted with all that many rich people. I am acquainted with the stories of many many more who succeeded through legal and smart actions. No doubt some of the rich folks made their fortune through nefarious means, but not all. The cheat/steal/murder business model simply isnât required to achieve success but does add a tremendous amount of risk to the proposition, much of it unpredictable, unmanageable, life threatening risk.
By the by, maybe we should define our terms regarding what constitutes being ârichâ, considering the differences between being âwell offâ or ârichâ or âwealthyâ. Sometimes the difference is more a matter of perspective than of numbers. Remember also that the much reviled 1% is not an unchanging list. Every decade, even every year, some drop off the list and new names are added. Most people are on that list for only a relatively short time.
2 Likes
Were there not a few Star Trek episodes along this theme?
Likely at least a few on this forum that have also been fortunate to do that as well. With current salary rates and 401(ks), it is quite easy, will still take a long time, but not difficult. Unfortunately, one million dollars today isnât going to get one very far.
1 Like
Absolutely.
1 Like
Thatâs a bit harsh. While government service does tend to attract megalomaniacal types, along with bullies, narcissists, and sycophants (to name but a few) it is a ânecessary evilâ for any civilization to rise above a certain level of population or territory, or economically advance beyond subsistence farming and barter.
To quote James Madison in Federalist #51:
âIf Men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and the next place, oblige it to control itself.â
â James Madison
4 Likes
Iâm not looking to argue. I stated how I feel by what I see and have experienced. I understand that some donât agree with anything I sayâŠIâm good with that. When your right to debate with me is taken it probably wasnât a farmer that did it.
3 Likes
My point has been to say that I think youâre painting with too broad a brush, vilifying an entire class of people based on the misdeeds of a few. That sort of argument isnât likely to go over very well here since that is exactly the sort of argument made against gun rights and in favor of reparations, to name a few. It doesnât fly when applied to gun owners and it doesnât fly when applied to âthe richâ.
Are you done now? What was your point??? We are still trying to figure out where youâre going with this other than to piss off or piss on some of the Vets here! 
It seems to me your trying to infringe on Treverâs right to free speech. 
1 Like
There are some who would qualify as megalomaniacs but our greatest worries today are SOCIOPATHS. THEY:
!) Have no regard for right or wrong.
2) Ignore the rights and feelings of others.
3) Intentionally make others angry or upset.
4) Manipulate or treat others harshly or with cruel indifference.
5) Lack remorse and/or do not regret their behavior.
6) Lack empathy, meaning they donât care about or understand other peopleâs feelings.
7) Take advantage of others for their own personal gain.
8) Act without thinking of the possible consequences of their actions.
9) Feel a sense of accomplishment when they act this way.
10) Have issues with infidelity.
Sociopaths may or may not break the law, but by exploiting or manipulating others, they violate the trust that the human enterprise runs on.
I got this by Googling âSociopath Definitionâ.
**QUESTION:**Which political party exhibits the larger amount of these traits??
3 Likes
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Lesseeee,
Wait! Wait! donât tell meâŠ
Itâs on da tippa my tongue!
What? Starts with a âDâ?
Followers of Satan spelled backwards spells Demoncrats!
6 Likes
You just described a few new forum members this year.
4 Likes
Iâm good with it. Iâve always took heat online. Oddly enough it never happens face to face at all.
2 Likes
Woah! Where did that come from?
What was my point? I thought I was making myself pretty clear, but if you arenât understanding then just ask and Iâll be glad to try to explain further. If you have a different idea about the topic then join in and add your perspective.
I believe that Trever and I were having a conversation about a topic we appear to disagree on; he was making his points and I was trying to make mine. Thatâs the essence of free speech. If Trever no longer wants to be part of the conversation all he has to do is walk away. I certainly canât force him to engage, nor do I want to. As to infringing on free speech, so far youâre the only one telling someone else to shut up.
P.S.: For clarification, my point is that the United States, more than anywhere else in the world, is still a place where a person can rise on their own merits and succeed, financially or otherwise, without resorting to criminality. Not sure how that would piss off any of the Veterans on here.
Yaaa⊠O.K. if you say so.
Well, I sure canât argue with that!
Dating myself here, back when Steve Martin was doing stand-up. âHow to become a millionaire,first, get a million dollarsâ.
3 Likes