Moving to: m/AskMbin!

18 readers

5 users here now

### We are moving! **Join us in our new journey as we take a new direction towards the future for this community at mbin, find our new community here and read this post to know more about why we are moving. Thank you and we hope to see you there!**

founded 1 year ago

125

Can a rich person be a good person? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by minnieo@kbin.social to c/AskKbin@kbin.social

231 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I don't mean doctor-making-150k-a-year rich, I mean properly rich with millions to billions of dollars.

I think many will say yes, they can be, though it may be rare. I was tempted to. I thought more about it and I wondered, are you really a good person if you're hoarding enough money you and your family couldn't spend in 10 lifetimes?

I thought, if you're a good person, you wouldn't be rich. And if you're properly rich you're probably not a good person.

I don't know if it's fair or naive to say, but that's what I thought. Whether it's what I believe requires more thought.

There are a handful of ex-millionaires who are no longer millionaires because they cared for others in a way they couldn't care for themselves. Only a handful of course, I would say they are good people.

And in order to stay rich, you have to play your role and participate in a society that oppresses the poor which in turn maintains your wealth. Are you really still capable of being a good person?

Very curious about people's thoughts on this.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

idk, you probably have a small number of artists and genuinely lucky-sons-of-bitches who get proper rich without being bad people. Or at least with their wealth not coming from being a bad person.

[–] Anomandaris@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

Yeah, fair enough, I'm not too arrogant to admit there are exceptions to every rule.

And more power to artists and exotic chefs and others, who are able to get sociopath billionaires to fork out crazy amounts of money for their work.

[–] sadreality@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They still benefit from regime in place to maintain their wealth and many are by default daddy's lap dogs.

People love putting up singers or athletes as they earned their money "fair" etc but these people end shilling for the benefit of the same rich daddies

Their art literally supports the status quo.

For example NBA players and China, rappers shilling "prosperity rap" and many singers putting out generic catchy music. Wouldn't want to bite the hand that feeds them, ay?

They mostly never take a stand but to be fair those that do get punished and removed from public eye.

George Carlin was an OG about it, said shit that was so true when most of us were still shitting diapers.

You can turn any of his content on today. 100% on point and relavent. It is a bit uncanny.

I am sure he made good money but at least he didn't lie about how it works. Most celebs are more worried about other celebs accepting them into rich daddy club... Not their audiences

[–] HandsHurtLoL@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think I can 100% get behind the direct link that being an artist makes you a virtuous person, though I understand your bigger point.

I think we are overlooking tremendously how the art world is often a method in which the ultra wealthy wash their money. I don't think that artists that rise to the level of success of becoming a household name are blind to this.

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I meant more that art isn't an inherently morally problematic way of making a large amount of money, unlike, say, crushing surplus value out of the working class at the expense of their health and happiness.

[–] HandsHurtLoL@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I get your larger point, but if an artist makes bank off someone who is crushing surplus value out of the working class, then isn't that still evil but with extra steps?

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I mean, we're getting to 'there is no ethical consumption under capitalism' level abstraction there, and it's a bit early in the morning for me to be arguing for or against that. XD