Very well correct.
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (13)
sorted by:
Make Every Dynasty Die Nasty
Abolish inheritance and end the heiristocracy forever. The trillions from that will eliminate the need for any other taxes. It will also greatly increase the GNP, because most top jobs are passed on through unearned birth privileges. That well-hidden cancer puts inferior people in superior positions and has destroyed all previous civilizations.
Eliminate trust funds and living off a high allowance in college. Real men and real Americans say, "If we have to get ahead all on our own, so must the brats of the rich. If Daddy sets them up halfway to the finish line, break their legs and make them crawl the rest of the way."
That's how commies started out...
Ideology Is a Spitball Fight at a Prep School
Who tells you that myth? Commies are, and always have been, richkids. So it's the complete opposite of what they've made you believe, even though you know perfectly well that Leftists are conceited snobs, an upper-class characteristic.
The reason Marxism is an upper-class fad is that its main appeal is that it necessitates absolute power for the ruling elite. Guillotine-fodder Preppies have been told by their plutocratic fathers that they have been "Born to Rule," so that autocratic oligarchic lure is what motivates all bossy Leftists. Further proof is that the cradle of Communism and the only place where it is not a fringe group is the University, which is an institution specifically designed for richkids living off an allowance. Since college work is work without pay, the other students, the wannabe Preppies, are teenagers who are afraid to grow up.
Abolishing inheritance is a terrible idea for two reasons:
“If Daddy sets them up halfway to the finish line, break their legs and make them crawl” Not only do you fail to define what the finish line is (I imagine that’s highly subjective), you have revealed that your primary motivation is envy. If you can’t have X, then no one should have it.
The Motto of Manly Genius: "If You're So Smart, Why Haven't You Made the Rich Poorer?"
No one has the right to pick winners and losers in the next generation. You show an envy of the talented, whose natural finish is blocked by your spoiled heroes who have been set up in front of them through Daddy's Money. If someone steals my money, am I "jealous" because then he has money and I don't? Where do you get this medieval-peasant attitude? Your own inferiority makes you prefer bluebloods and brown-noses to brains.
Inheritance is nothing but bribery. If someone pays off the umpire to ensure that his kid, the pitcher, gets a wide strike-zone, will you, as a slavish Lord-loving peasant, excuse that because the father did it "with his own money"?
Familyism is even more primitive than tribalism. The Social Darwinism of Survival of the Fatherest inevitably destroys all societies. It gets worse generation by generation and is the main cause of the present decline. The Tipping Point was reached by 1960, and it's all been downhill since then. Worst of all, people have been intimidated into not demanding its abolition. Obviously, partisan attacks on the other side's Preppies only are meaningless to Awakening.
How does receiving an inheritance automatically make the next generation a “winner” and others “losers”? You haven’t even attempted to define what those terms mean in this context. People receive massive inheritances (or lottery winnings) and spend so much of it that they put themselves in poverty. I wouldn’t call that “winning” at all.
How does someone receiving an inheritance rob you of what’s yours? Provided that the parents did not gain their wealth through fraud or blackmail, you have not been wronged in any way by others acquiring wealth and wanting to pass it on to their kids.
Inheritance is not bribery. Words have meanings, please understand what words mean before you use them.
“Family ism is more primitive than tribalism”. That’s precisely why parents would want to give their children an inheritance in the first place. It gives people a motive to work, save, and invest. Thanks for helping my own argument.
Nothing about my points has remotely suggested that I am in favor of feudal peasantry. Free market economies, not feudalism, has done more to lift people out of poverty than any other economic system in human history. And the notion that the free market is anything like Social Darwinism shows that you know nothing of how either system works. Social Darwinism is the notion that certain people or groups of people succeed because they are inherently superior in some ill-defined way. Free markets just allows people to do with their own property as they see fit, and says nothing about who will prosper and who won’t. Again, if you want to boss other people around and tell them what they can or can’t do with the resources they’ve lawfully acquired, that is nothing more than your own envy talking. I want to give others the freedom to do as they please so long as they don’t defraud others, you don’t want them to have that freedom because you are a socialist.