I've had theories about this, but it basically boils down to that unless you started off poor and know the challenges and how difficult it is to become rich, you really are incapable of genuine sympathy. Thus why those who inherit their wealth are not so generous with it, because, we'll, "how hard is it to become rich? I am and, why I just sat here."
However, tangential to this theory is also why leftists who are rich, tend to insist that the poor must be helped, but much prefer to force you to be charitable with YOUR money, rather than theirs. It is no coincidence communist intellectual titans such as Marx and Che Che were spoiled little brats, born with silver spoons in their mouths. They never had to work, they were trust fund babies. And having such a life of luxury afforded them the genuine intellectual luxury of advocating socialism and communism. They never had to work. They never had to strive. All they had to do was in order to sound cool and hip and intellectual was advocate a new economic system that would transfer the wealth from the producers to the parasites...err....I mean the "have's" and "have not's." Of course, they still had to be in command and be members of the elite in this new society, but they "cared" about the people.
Sadly you can see this strain or viral thought in many elite or "limousine liberals" today.
4 comments:
To a great extent liberal "caring" is a manifestation of narcissism. It's not about doing good by the lower classes, it's about public affirmation of their do-gooder status. Any actual good that gets done is entirely accidental.
I wish I could find the study, but someone showed empirically that Republicans give more to charity than Democrats. I don't know if the author distinguished between "charity" and "church donations."
Nevertheless, I recall during the 2004 campaign when the tax returns came out, Cheney and Bush gave many multiples of the amount that Kerry gave to charity. Kerry's wife, a billionairess, paid only 12% of her income in taxes. There were two years during the 1990's where Kerry gave zero to charity.
I had to earn my way to where I am out of homelessness. I give nothing to charity for two reasons. 1) I was only one handout away from staying homeless, 2) Just yesterday I saw a homeless guy in the alley smoking dope. I used to feed homeless people in the shelters - they aren't "hungry." The change in their collection cups go for booze, drugs, lotto tickets and $5 hookers.
The non-entrepreneurs in this chart aren't trust-fund beneficiaries--for the most part they're people who earn wages (rather than entrepreneurial profits). The cutoff for the highest quintile is only $66,000. They're certainly not talking about trust-fund kids in the lower four quintiles, and mostly not in the upper quintile.
I'm not rich. I think the rich largely earn what they have and nobody has any right to take it from them. Am I incapable of sympathy?
I agree with the general thrust of your point, but I think you're straying a bit into hyperbole at times. Great chart though.
Post a Comment