Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Suma who wrote (37528)	7/3/2005 11:26:21 AM
From: MichaelSkyy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Most of you posting are part of the nouveau riche... nouveau riche Nouveau riche ( Fr. "newly rich") is a term, usually derogatory, to describe persons who acquire wealth within their generation, and spend it conspicuously. The implication is that, being of lower- or middle-class origin, these individuals lack the taste to properly use wealth. Hence, this class of people is sometimes ill-regarded by old money as culturally inferior, comparatively lacking in pedigree and subtlety. The concept of "nouveau riche" is exemplified by many American celebrities. Rodney Dangerfield in Caddyshack has been cited as one example of the archetypal "nouveau riche" persona. Another notable example is Elvis Presley and his Graceland estate. A fictional example of "nouveau riche" is Jay Gatsby from F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel The Great Gatsby. No comment...I'll leave it to others, because "I could care less, what you think or don't think."

To: Suma who wrote (37528)	7/3/2005 1:04:08 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Suma, there's no reason to get defensive about your values - i.e. valuing equality. What I was cautioning against was the notion that one could engineer equality of condition by such things as imposing one's views (or a party's views or the majority's views) of what is a "just" price for someone's product or labor in place of a free market determined price. And contrary to your dismissal of my references to Marxist socialism as merely a prejudicial association, it is really entirely relevant. Equality imposed by authority, whether dictatorial or "democratic" authority, is the same thing - a huge mistake. You can't engineer true equality of condition. You can, however, engineer equal misery for the masses with relative prosperity for those holding the authority. Or you can engineer (relative) equality of opportunity by setting the rules of the game to eliminate unfair advantages and disadvantages, and let the chips fall where they may. That's what we try to do in societies they understand the importance of economic liberty and it works reasonably well. Certainly better than the alternative - the attempts to engineer equality of condition.

To: Suma who wrote (37528)	7/3/2005 2:07:30 PM
From: ManyMoose	Respond to of 90947

I'm too young to have experienced the Depression, but my parents did and their frugality carried them through. They practiced it almost to a fault, and now I am still trying to get rid of stuff that has no practical use in today's economy but they kept because they could see potential for it. My only point was that you don't fix inequity by tearing down success, but by adding to it. I have no love for people with a surplus of money and a lack of sense, but tearing them down to reduce disparity is not the way to go. Build up the lower levels. No way am I part of the new rich. I'm a retired wage-earner and my pension is barely enough.