Do the rich have moral obligation to help the poor?

[Deleted]

Hmm. Many people here seem to forget that the rich already pay taxes, that are in turn used to support everyone including poor people.

So in saying rich should not help poor, that means .. well u can guess it. We had something along those lines in the middle ages. Didn't work that well cuz sloooow progress^^

Nowadays most societies try to get some kind of set living standard for everyone. To do this you HAVE to tax the rich ones, at higher rates usually, to get the money needed for this. In turn, it prevents those old problems of some people dying of starvation, revolutions and other stuff. Worked out so far for most countries imo.


Long story short: Yes, rich should be forced to support poor, they are not morally obliged to do so. It is needed to keep the society as a whole running.

On a sidenote: studies have shown for countries with higher taxes and a higher living standard to be less volatile and violent. It is nothing new.

[May90]

I see a lot of people saying that the rich should help the poor because they became rich thanks to the poor. While it might be true, I think they are already paying off this debt in their taxes. The reason I think they still should feel the need to do extra charity is different: basic human empathy. When someone is in need and we can help them without hurting ourselves much, it is the right thing to do. I personally wouldn't be able to live in peace if I had, say, a billion dollars, and dozens thousands people in my town were struggling to feed their families - I would feel the need to help them, just because they need my help and because I can help them. Not because I owe something to them.

[Rend Blackhand]

Any argument that is based on 'its the moral thing to do' is total horseshit.

[PosPosPos]

The rich should rob the poor bare: oligarchy for the win!

It's not like it's not happening already, just too slow for my tastes.

[maccajoe]

They "should" help the poor out of their own will. They shouldn't be obliged.
How ever land taxes, insurance, goods taxes etc should all he percentage based so the rich end up paying a relatively reasonable amount.
Now is it unreasonable to make them pay abit higher percentages? I don't think so.

[Hana Song]

No, if you are poor it's in most cases because you don't work hard enough to advance.

[stabetha]

Got to say I was expecting "There should not be rich or poor: everyone should be equal." to be leading, MMOC-OT surprises me everyday.

[LoopyLoop]

No they should not be forced to support the poor. Everyone should be free to spend their money as they wish.

No, if you are poor it's in most cases because you don't work hard enough to advance.

Also this.

[Deleted]

Of course not, it's their money and when they've paid their taxes it's up to themselves how they spend it. It's the government's job to help the poor.

[kail]

No, if you are poor it's in most cases because you don't work hard enough to advance.

Because those toilets will clean themselves. Those burgers love to flip as well. Reality is there will always be the bottom tier jobs that have to be filled. ATM the people with those jobs are in a financially fucked situation, despite how long and hard they work.

[Hana Song]

Because those toilets will clean themselves. Those burgers love to flip as well. Reality is there will always be the bottom tier jobs that have to be filled. ATM the people with those jobs are in a financially fucked situation, despite how long and hard they work.

If you're in a job like that for the rest of your life then that is your own fault for not advancing

[Xarkan]

If you're in a job like that for the rest of your life then that is your own fault for not advancing

I imagine that the top brick in a pyramid of bricks would also tell the lowest brick that it is its own fault and that every brick could be a top brick?

[Hana Song]

I imagine that the top brick in a pyramid of bricks would also tell the lowest brick that it is its own fault and that every brick could be a top brick?

You must have no aspirations or intent to better your situation if you are stuck cleaning for the rest of your life

[Xarkan]

You must have no aspirations or intent to better your situation if you are stuck cleaning for the rest of your life

But imagine a society where the amount of people cleaning was insufficient then. There must be a certain amount of cleaning ladies and men (less as technology allows but still)

[Ishayu]

I imagine that the top brick in a pyramid of bricks would also tell the lowest brick that it is its own fault and that every brick could be a top brick?

I like how you try to evade his point by asserting that people are bricks in a pyramid - that it is impossible for them to move.

Absolutely ridiculous.

[Dr Assbandit]

If you're in a job like that for the rest of your life then that is your own fault for not advancing

What an asinine argument. Based on anecdotal evidence alone I have friends who work 2 or even 3 jobs while trying to take online classes to "advance" in life. Yet, they will never live as comfortably as I do as things currently stands solely based on the fact that my family is well off and I was able to get a better education etc.

You clearly live in a fantasy land if you honestly think everyone is on an equal playing field.

[Hana Song]

But imagine a society where the amount of people cleaning was insufficient then. There must be a certain amount of cleaning ladies and men (less as technology allows but still)

That doesn't have anything to do with people being stuck in it, if they want to move on from it then they need to have some aspiration or intent to get themself out of there

[Xarkan]

I like how you try to evade his point by asserting that people are bricks in a pyramid - that it is impossible for them to move.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Your assumption that there can be a society where all have (can) progressed up is ridiculous. There must be people doing those jobs.

[Nalorakk]

Beyond tax, which benefits everyone in the long run I see no reason as to why rich people would need to help the poor.

That being said, it should be encouraged some way or another.

[Ishayu]

But imagine a society where the amount of people cleaning was insufficient then. There must be a certain amount of cleaning ladies and men (less as technology allows but still)

If society badly needs people to clean, but there aren't enough to clean, then you have only two choices as an employer:

1) Stop cleaning, your place looks like a mess.
2) Offer more money for cleaning.

Free market capitalism works like that. People tend to only see the competition on goods and services and completely forget the competition on offering a good place to work for some reason.

- - - Updated - - -

Your assumption that there can be a society where all have progressed up is ridiculous. There must be people doing those jobs.

But who says those jobs have to be bottom jobs?

You do know how much a garbage disposer gets in Denmark, right? Probably earns more than you.