Trumps: White Angry Middleclass

[Ultralight]

I have heard that argument made in a slightly different context.

The case given was for an investment banker earning $600K annually. Disgusted with her life of greed, she considers chucking it all and working as a relief volunteer in South Sudan.

But not so fast, says a concerned utilitarian. Local workers can be hired for a sack of rice per week. She is ethically obligated to stay in investment banking and donate her salary to hire squadrons of local relief workers in order to serve the greater good.

Investment banking does not serve the greater good.

That is like saying one must keep working at his job clear-cutting forests so he can afford to replant trees. Better to just not cut down the trees.

[Alan]

Does Alan decide if they are operating at, below, or above their abilities?

Nope, but according to socialist dogma, don't we all have a duty to contribute as much as possible in order to fulfill our obligations to the collective? Every benefit must have a corresponding responsibility.

[Ultralight]

Nope, but according to socialist dogma, don't we all have a duty to contribute as much as possible in order to fulfill our obligations to the collective? Every benefit must have a corresponding responsibility.

Uh... no.

Think of socialism this way:

"Many hands make light work."

[jp1]

I have heard that argument made in a slightly different context.

The case given was for an investment banker earning $600K annually. Disgusted with her life of greed, she considers chucking it all and working as a relief volunteer in South Sudan.

But not so fast, says a concerned utilitarian. Local workers can be hired for a sack of rice per week. She is ethically obligated to stay in investment banking and donate her salary to hire squadrons of local relief workers in order to serve the greater good.

I suppose her decision should be based on why she wants to be a relief volunteer in South Sudan. If it's truly because she wants to help as many people there as possible then, yes, she should probably continue working as a banker and donate the salary. If it's because she wants to leave her soul sucking job and do something she considers more meaningful with her life energy then by all means she should quit and go do that. But she should be honest with herself about her true motivations for going there if she does the second option.

[Alan]

Uh... no.

Hmm, maybe that's why socialism doesn't work.

[LDAHL]

Investment banking does not serve the greater good.

Of course it does. Investment bankers are the heralds of capitalism. They assemble the elements that advance new technologies, fund infrastructure and otherwise deploy resources efficiently.

[Ultralight]

Hmm, maybe that's why socialism doesn't work.

Capitalism doesn't work, Alan. lol

[Ultralight]

Of course it does. Investment bankers are the heralds of capitalism. They assemble the elements that advance new technologies, fund infrastructure and otherwise deploy resources efficiently.

Nope.

[LDAHL]

I suppose her decision should be based on why she wants to be a relief volunteer in South Sudan. If it's truly because she wants to help as many people there as possible then, yes, she should probably continue working as a banker and donate the salary. If it's because she wants to leave her soul sucking job and do something she considers more meaningful with her life energy then by all means she should quit and go do that. But she should be honest with herself about her true motivations for going there if she does the second option.

That was the basic counter-argument I made. That benefit-maximization is more an economic than an ethical argument. My friend responded that the Sudanese would ultimately be better served by benefit maximization.

[Ultralight]

If your widget manufacturing business pollutes the groundwater then the best thing you can do is keep making widgets so you can afford to buy water filters for those effected by your water pollution too. Got it. Makes sense.